Telephone conversations in Chinese and English: A comparative study across languages and functions
Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors Sun, Hao
Publisher The University of Arizona.
Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Download date 08/10/2021 04:05:28
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/282739 INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overiaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Infonnation Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Aibor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
NOTE TO USERS
The original manuscript received by UMi contains pages with indistinct and/or slanted print. Pages were microfilmed as received.
This reproduction is the best copy available
UMI
TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS IN CHINESE AND ENGLISH:
A COMP.ARATIVE STUDY ACROSS LANGUAGES AND FUNCTIONS
by
Hao Sun
Copyright © Hao Sun 1998
A Dissertation Submitted to the Facuhy of the
GRADUATE INTERDISCIPLINARY PROGRAM IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND TEACHING
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
19 9 8 DMI Number; 99017 67
Copyright 199 8 by Sun, Hao
All rights reserved.
UMI Microform 9901767 Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. Ail rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA <£ GRADUATE COLLEGE
As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have
read the dissertation prepared by HAG SUN' entitled TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS IN CHINESE AMD ENGLISH: A COMPARATIVE STUDY ACROSS LANGUAGES AND FUNCTIONS
and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Phijosophy
Muriel Saville-Trqike Date
O^ne Hill Dat^
-4 Kimber^y ^Jojies D^
Date
Date
Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Graduate College.
I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. J Dissertatiofv Director Muriel Saville-Troike Date 3
STATEMENT BY AUTHOR
This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library
Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder.
SIGNED: 4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation is completed with both guidance and support from many people, including professors, colleagues, friends, and family. 1 would like to take this opportunity to express mv great appreciation and gratitude to all the people who have contributed in various ways to the successtlil completion of this study. First, I want to sincerely thank the members of my dissertation committee, professors Muriel Saville-Troike, Jane Hill, and Kim Jones, for their great encouragement, insightftil advice, and helpful suggestions in the process of my research and writing. I am also grateful to Professor Feng-hsi Liu who kindly read my draft and provided instructive comments during her sabbatical I am most indebted to my dissertation chair and mentor. Professor Muriel Saville-Troike, who has provided me with excellent guidance, insightful advice, generous support and tremendous help, both academically and professionally, in all my years of study in both the MA and Ph.D. programs at L'A. Thanks to her constant guidance and genuine support (both academically and logistically), I was able to undertake and complete the di.ssertation while living with my family off campus. I feel extremely fortunate to be advised by Professor Saville-Troike. whose guidance, advice, understanding and support has profoundly inspired and influenced my academic and professional growth Special thanks go to all my participants in China and in the U S., who graciously and generously assisted me in the collection of data and in sharing their insights with me: Qingxian Cui, Peiwen Fei, Bonnie Fonseca-Greber, Holly Jacobson, Yili Li, Xiaoxi Liu, Elaine Morton, Martha Schulte-Nafeh. Yvonne Roepcke. Gail Shuck, Jie Wang, Lei Wang, Yijiang Xu, Yiqun Xu, Peihua Xue, YiCui Yin, Qiuling Yu, and Min Zou. I am truly blessed with the support of these friends who provided me w ith not only the valuable data but a rich tapestry of conversation that displays understanding, sharing, support, and collaboration. It is with great interest and fond memories that I repeatedly listened to the conversations which were enjoyable and kept me interested. Finally, my family deserves special thanks, without whose love, understanding, and support my dissertation would not have been completed. My husband Hanzhang's unfailing love, thorough understanding, and tremendous help constitute the most significant source of encouragement, strength and support for me. I also want to thank my son Lei for his love, support, and forgiving me for not having spent as much time with him as I wanted during my research and writing I am most grateful to my parents and my brother's family for their understanding and support of my study in the U.S. In addition, I want to extend my deep gratitude to my parents-in-law for their support of my research. 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES 11
ABSTRACT 12
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 13 1.1 Background 13 1 2 Purpose and Approach 16 1.3 Research Questions 16 1.4 Potential Significance 17 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 19 2.1 Approaches to Discourse 19 2.1.1 Ethnography of Communication 19 2.1.2 Conversation Analysis 21 2.1.3 Interactional Sociolinguistics 23 2.1.4 Different Approaches in Perspective 25 2.1.5 Brown and Yule's Theory of Functional Language 26 2.2 Studies on Conversational Interaction 27 2.2.1 Conversational Maxims 27 2.2 2 Content and Structure 28 2.2.3 Conversation Styles 30 2 2 4 The Validity Issue 32 2.3 Chinese Conversational Styles 32 2.3 1 Discourse Structure 33 2.3 2 Issues of Coherence 35 2.3.3 Strategies for Disagreement and .Agreement 37 2.3.4 Inside vs Outside Relations 40 2.4 Telephone Conversation 43 2.4.1 Opening Sequences 43 2.4 2 Closings 48 2.4.3 Cross-cultural Studies 52 2.4.4 Universality Versus Diversity 58 2.4.5 Calls for More Empirical Investigation 61 2.5 The Interplay of LI and L2 in Conversation 62 2.5.1 Pragmatics in Language Learning 62 2.5.2 Interaction of LI and L2 Conversational Styles 63 2.5.3 Influence of L2 on LI 65 2.5.4 An Intercultural Style: Two-way Interference 66 CHAPTERS: METHODOLOGY 68 3.1 Dimensions of Comparison 68 3.2 Participants 73 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Continued
3.3 Database "75 3 4 Data Collection 76 3.4.1 Types of Data "76 3.4.2 Procedures for Recording 77 3 4 3 Recording Equipment and Time Span 79 3.5 Analytic Procedure 79 3.5.1 Procedure 79 3 5 2 Categorization 81 3 5 3 Variables 81 3 5 4 Analytic Models 83 3. 6 Method of Transcribing Data 84 3 7 Terms for Coding 85 3.7.1 Opening 85 3 7 2 Phatic Utterances 85 3 7.3 Statement of Purpose 86 3.7.4 Pre-closing 86 3.7.5 Initiation of Closing 87 3 7.6 Leave-taking 88 3.8 Terms for Analysis 88 3.8.1 Greeting by A 88 3.8.2 Greeting by C 88 3 8 3 Acknowledgment 89 3 8 4 Affirming A"s ID by C 89 3.8 5 Caller self-Identification 89 3.8.6 Phatic Utterances for Opening 89 3 8.7 Phatic Utterances for Closing 90 3.8 8 Simultaneous Initiation (of either closing or leave-taking) 90 CHAPTER 4: CONTENT AND STRUCTUR.\L ANALYSIS 91 4. 1 Telephone Conversations by Native Speakers ofChinese in China 91 4 11 Transactional Calls 92 A. Opening 92 (a) Greeting 92 (b) Identification 94 (c) Phatic utterances 97 B. Statement of Purpose 98 C. Closing 102 (a) Pre-closinu 102 (b) Initiation of closinu 102 (c) Phatic utterances 104 (d) Leave-takinu 104 4 1.2 Interactional Calls 113 A. Opening 1 13 7
TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Continued
(a) Greetina 1 13 (b) Identification 117 (c) Phatic Utterances 122 B Statement of Purpose 128 C Closing 130 (a) Pre-closinu 130 Initiation of closinti 131 (c) Phatic utterances 132 (d) Leave-taking 133 4.1.3 Interactional-Transactional Calls 140 A Opening 141 (a) Greeting 141 (b) Identification 142 (c) Phatic utterances 149 B. Statement of Purpose 152 C Closing 154 (a) Pre-Closing 154 (b) Initiation of closinu 154 (c) Phatic utterances 155 (d) Leave-taking 156 4. 2 Telephone Conversations by Native Speakers of American English 161 4 2. 1 Transactional Calls 162 A Opening 162 (a) Greeting 162 (b) Identification 165 (c) Phatic utterances 167 B Statement of Purpose 169 C Closing 172 (a) Pre-closing 172 (b) Initiation of closing 174 (c) Phatic utterances 176 (d) Leave-taking 178 4.2.2 Interactional Calls 182 A. Opening 183 (a) Greeting 183 (b) Identification 184 (c) Phatic Utterances 184 B. Statement of Purpose 186 C Closing 187 (a) Pre-closing 188 (b) Initiation of closing 188 (c) Phatic utterances 189 (d) Leave-taking 190 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
4.2.3 Interactional-Transactional Calls 191 A. Opening 192 (a) Greetinu 192 (b) Identification 193 (c) Phatic utterances 194 B Statement of Purpose 197 C Closing 198 (a) Pre-closinu 198 (b) Initiation of closing 198 (c) Phatic utterances 199 (d) Leave-takinu 200 4.3 Telephone Conversations in Chinese by Native Speakers of Chinese in the U S 202 4.3.1 Transactional Calls in Chinese 203 A. Opening 203 (a) Greetinu 203 (b) Identification 204 (c) Phatic utterances 206 B Statement of Purpose 207 C Closing 209 (a) Pre-closing 209 (b) Initiation of closing 209 (c) Phatic utterances 212 (d) Leave-takinu 212 4.3.2 Interactional Calls 216 A Opening 217 (a) Greeting 217 (b) Identification 221 (c) Phatic utterances 222 B Statement of Purpose 225 C Closing 226 (a) Pre-closing 226 (b) Initiation of closing 227 (c) Phatic utterances 228 (d) Leave-taking 23 1 4.3.3 Interactional-Transactional Calls 236 A. Opening 236 (a) Greetinu 236 (b) identification 236 (c) Phatic utterances 237 B. Statement of Purpose 238 C Closing 241 (a) Pre-closinu 241 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Continued
(b) Initiation of closinu 241 (c) Phatic utterances 245 (d) Leave-takinii 247 4.4. Telephone Conversations in English by Native Speakers of Chinese 253 4 4 1 Transactional Calls 254 A Opening 254 (a) Greetina 254 (h) identification 255 (c) Phatic utterances 255 B. Statement of Purpose 257 C Closing 259 (a) Pre-closing 259 (b) Initiation of closinu 259 (c) Phatic utterances 260 (d) Leave-taking 261 4.4.2 Interactional Calls 263 A Opening 264 (a) Greeting 264 (b) Identification 264 (c) Phatic utterances 269 B Statement of Purpose 270 C Closing 271 (a) Pre-closin^ 271 (b) Initiation of closinu 271 (c) Phatic utterances 273 (d) Leave-taking 273 4.4 3 Interactional-Transactional Calls 275 A. Opening 276 (a) Greeting 276 (b) Identification 276 (c) Phatic utterances 280 B Statement of Purpose 282 C Closing 283 (a) Pre-Closing 283 (b) Initiation of closinu 283 (c) Phatic utterances 284 (d) Leave-taking 284 CHAPTER 5: COiVIPAR.\TIVE ANALYSIS 287 5.1 Social and Cultural Setting 287 5.1.1 Initial Greeting in T calls 288 5.1.2 Caller Self-identification 289 5.1.3 Caller's Greeting 290 I 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS -- Continued
5.1.4 Statement of Purpose in I Calls 292 5.15 Interaction Patterns in Closing for T Calls 293 5 1.6 Code Switching in Opening 294 5.1,7 Code Switching in Closing 296 5.2 Language and culture: Chinese and English 299 5.2.1 Caller Identification 300 5.2.2 Caller's Greeting 301 5.2.3 Phatic Utterances 301 5.2 4 Sequencing of identification and phatic utterances 303 5.2.5 Linguistic Forms for Closing 306 5.2.6 Leave-taking 306 5.3 Native Language Versus Second Language 308 5 3 1 Caller Identification 309 5 3 2 Caller's Greeting 3 11 5.3 .3 Statement of Purpose 3 12 5.3 .4 Phatic Utterances for Closing 312 5 .4 Different Types of Telephone Calls 314 5.4 1 Shared Features 3 15 A. Phatic inquiries 315 B. Pre-closinu 3 16 C Initiation of closing 3 18 D. The choice of language 320 5.4 2 Language Specific Features 322 A. Interactional patterns in closinu 322 B. Identification sequence 323 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 324 6.1 Summar\ of Findings 324 6.2 Significance 33 1 APPENDIX A: TR.ANSCRIPTION CONVENTION 333
APPENDIX B: CODING PRINCIPLES 334
APPENDIX C: TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR TRANSCRIPTS 336
APPENDIX D: TRANSCRIPTS 337
REFERENCES 476 I I
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 3 1, Dimensions of Comparison 70 TABLE 3 2, Participants TABLE 3.3, Recorded Database TABLE 4.1, CC: Transactional, Opening ^8 TABLE 4.2, CC: Transactional, Closing 10*^ TABLE 4.3, CC: Interactional, Opening 127 TABLE 4.4, CC: Interactional. Closing 140 TABLE 4.5, CC: Interactional-Transactional, Opening 1^2 TABLE 4.6, CC: Interactional-Transactional. Closing 160 TABLE 4.7, AA: Transactional. Opening 168 TABLE 4.8. AA: Transactional, Closing 181 TABLE 4.9, AA: Interactional, Opening 186 TABLE 4.10. AA: Interactional. Closing 191 TABLE 4.11. AA: Interactional-Transactional. Opening 197 TABLE 4.12. AA: Interactional-Transactional, Closing 202 TABLE 4.13, CA: Transactional. Opening 207 TABLE 4.14, CA: Transactional. Closing 216 TABLE 4.15, CA: Interactional. Opening 225 TABLE 4.16, CA: Interactional, Closing 235 TABLE 4.17, CA: Interactional-Transactional, Opening 238 TABLE 4.18, CA: Interactional-Transactional, Closing 253 TABLE 4.19. CAE: Transactional, Opening 256 TABLE 4.20. CAE: Transactional. Closing 263 T.ABLE 4.21. C.A.E: Interactional, Opening 270 TABLE 4.22. CAE: Interactional. Closing 275 TABLE 4.23. CAE: Interactional-Transactional, Opening 282 TABLE 4.24. CAE: Interactional-Transactional. Closing 286 TABLE 5.1. Comparison between CC and CA data 299 TABLE 5.2, Comparisson between CC and AA data 308 TABLE 5 3, Comparisson between AA and.CAE data 314 1 2
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was multifold: it aimed to investigate similarities and differences between Chinese and English telephone conversations, to test the validity of the theoretical distinction between transactional talk and interactional talk, and to examine L2 learners" use of the target language. Comparisons along four dimensions were conducted:
(1) across languages -Chinese and English. (2) across tlinctions - transactional and interactional talk, (3) across settings - China and the L' S . (4) Li vs L2 - English as native language and English as a second language.
The data consist of natural telephone conversations in Chinese and in English recorded by eighteen female participants (native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of
American English) and interviews with the participants. Four sets of data were analyzed:
Chinese telephone conversations recorded in China. Chinese telephone conversations recorded in the U.S.; English telephone conversations recorded in the U S.. and English telephone conversations recorded in the U S by native speakers of Chinese
The findings suggest that primar\- differences between Chinese and English telephone conversations occur in identification, phatic talk, and leave-taking. Transactional calls and interactional calls di.splay variation in greeting, phatic talk, initiation of closing, and register The comparison of the use of language between the two settings reveals differences predominantly in transactional calls The examination of L2 discourse suggests that learners" communicative competence will be further enhanced with the promotion of sociolinguistic knowledge and pragmatic awareness of the communicativ e event 1 3
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
l.l Background
Studies in anthropology, sociolinguistics and cross-cultural communication have
received increasing attention in the past three decades or so. demonstrating, among other
findings, that different cultures may have different interactional styles. What has been
assumed to be the norm for interaction in one culture may not be considered an appropriate
way of speaking in another society How people in different cultures communicate and to
what extent different languages share similarities in communication continues to interest
scholars; it is an issue of significance in a global community in which interaction across
cultures becomes more common
One of the best ways to examine interactional patterns in ditTerent speech communities
is to conduct comparative studies. Only by comparing can we perceive that even "natural"
and "logical" communicatixe behavior is actually culturally unique (Saville-Troike, 1989).
Although more researchers have begun to study interactional patterns of different
languages and cultures, there have only been a fevs studies which are specifically designed
for comparative investigation of conversational interaction.
Studies in Sino-American encounter often report that the Chinese discourse is
"inscrutable" due to differences between the Chinese communicative style and that of
Americans. Granted that there are differences in the two cultures regarding discourse styles. However, such generalization is problematic on two accounts: first, such a view derives from a Euro-centric perspective (Saville-Troike & Johnson, 1994) which uses the I 4
discourse convention of its own culture to cast judgment of that of other cultures.
Secondly, any objective and valid accounts of discourse or interactional styles of a given
culture need to be based on studies of the natural data provided by the native speakers of
the given culture, not based on the discourse data of their second language, namely: data in
English provided by native speakers of Chinese
There are different approaches to the study of discourse, one of them being Brown and
Levinson's theoretical distinction between "interactional" and "transactionaf" discourse
with different tlinctions and purposes. However, no empirical studies have been conducted
which primarily examine the validity of such a distinction and how it exemplifies itself in
language use.
Research on telephone conversation originated with the work of Schegloff and Sacks
in the 60's and 70's, focusing on telephone conversations in American English. It has been
proposed that there are universal principles at work in telephone conversations (e.g.
Hopper & Doany, 1989; Hopper. 1992). In the last several years, studies have been
conducted in other cultures, presenting findings that both support the universal claim and
challenge the position Nevertheless, research and publication on non-European languages
is scarce It is also imponant to note that most of the studies on telephone conversations
have primarily focused on the sequence at the beginning of the calls, with few exceptions
(e.g. Pavlidou, 1994) that take into consideration the whole speech event, including the
purpose of calling. In order to further examine what is shared across different languages,
more empirical research on telephone conversations is needed, as is called for by Schegloff
(1986), for instance 1 5
The study of telephone conversation is important for both theoretical and practical reasons: from a theoretical perspective, it is of significance to explore the issue of universality and diversity with regard to communicative behavior and discourse structure; from a practical point of view, since telephone communication has become one of the most common activities of our daily interaction, the study of interactional patterns in telephone conversations becomes significant because of our almost indispensable reliance on this technical invention and convenience
Furthermore, in a contemporary society which vs itnesses the need for and increase in inter-cultural communication, the study of telephone conversation in different languages has taken on new meaning Description and understanding of how people in other languages and cultures conduct telephone conversations might assist us in preventing or overcoming potential misunderstanding in cross-cultural communication.
.As a non-native speaker of English myself there are also personal reasons which kindled my initial interest on this topic. .Although 1 am tluent in English, I have occasionally experienced moments of awkwardness in telephone business calls when I was asked for my name during the calls. In these cases, my interlocutors were not taking my name for making orders or reservations, as I realized afterwards. They were merely asking for my name in order to address me Such interaction made me wonder if I failed to follow the appropriate discourse behavior in English telephone conversations, and I had hoped that there were some "How to" handbooks for pragmatics of telephone conversations in English which would explain, for example, when to identify oneself in calling. My search was not exhaustive, and therefore, 1 did not find what 1 was looking for Yet my personal I 6 experience urged me to explore the issue further by examining how native speakers actually conduct, and interact in, different types of calls Such investigation should provide an accurate account of native speakers" language use in context and consequently assist other learners of English in enhancing communicative competence.
1.2 Purpose and Approach
Inspired by research in sociolinguistics, comparative studies and studies on telephone conversations, this investigation is undertaken with multiple purposes. It aims to examine natural telephone conversations in Chinese and in English, conducting comparisons along the dimensions of social setting, language and culture, native language versus second language, and functions of telephone calls. Following the comparative model suggested by
Saville-Troike & Johnson (1994), this study uses natural data of recorded conversations by native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of English, incorporating native speakers" perspectives and interpretations of their sociolinguistic behavior in the analyses of the data and providing descriptions and analyses of social and cultural context of communicative behavior.
1.3 Research Questions
The investigation intends to answer the following general research questions;
1. How does the social and cultural setting (China versus the U.S.) affect the way native speakers conduct telephone conversations in Chinese, particularly the way they open and close conversations as well as the way they present purposes of calls'^ 1 "
2. How do native speakers of Chinese and native speaicers of English conduct
telephone conversations in Chinese and English, respectively'^ Particularly, how do they
open and close conversations"^ How do they present purposes of calls!'
3 How do native speakers of English and native speakers of Chinese conduct
telephone conversations in English as L1 and in English as L2, respectively'' Particularly,
how do they open and close conversationsl* How do they present purposes of calls']'
4. How do native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of English conduct interactional versus transactional talk in Chinese and in English, respectively'^ Particularly,
how do they open and close conversations'' How do they present purposes of calls''
1.4 Potential Significance
This study will ofl^er a sociolinguistic account of the ways native speakers of Chinese interact in telephone conversations in particular (which has not been investigated before), although it should enrich the study of sociolinguistics and the literature on comparative studies of conversational interaction in general. Furthermore, this study will enable us to empirically investigate the validity of the theoretical notion of interaction versus transaction talk as a possible variable for examining sociolinguistic behavior in two languages, and to uncover additional potential patterns of contrast. For the field of second language learning and teaching, the study will contribute to second language acquisition theory building, especially the development of spoken language, based on its e.Kploration of the interplay between first and second language in natural conversations. Methodologically, a 1 8 comparative approach will provide another case of applyinu the ethnography of communication to analysis of talk in action, thus helping to develop its dynamic potential. 1 9
CHAPTER 2: LITER.\TURE REVIEW
Discussions in this section cover the following topics approaches to discourse, studies
on conversational interaction. Chinese conversational style, telephone conversation, and
the interplay of L1 and L2 in conversation.
2.1 Approaches to Discourse
There are different approaches to the study of discourse As my study is centered upon
conversational interaction. I will limit my discussion to approaches that first, examine
verbal communication and secondly, investigate verbal communication beyond sentence
level. I have also included Brown and Yule's functional language theory- in my discussion
here although it not obviously on a par with other approaches with regard to its theoretical development, analytical tools, and influence. Nevertheless, as it is one of the basic concepts for my present investigation. I deem it essential to review it in this section.
2.1.1 Ethnography of Communication
Based in anthropology and linguistics. Ethnography of Communication (henceforth
EC) situates communication as cultural behavior, seeking to discover and explicate the shared knowledge-base for contextually appropriate beha\ ior. i.e . what the individual needs to know in order to become a functional member of the community and how he/she acquires it. Concerned with the description and understanding of communicative behavior in specific cultural settings, EC aims to show how communication is patterned and organized within the community and how it interacts with culture 2 (t
More importantly, a fundamental assumption of EC is that communication is culture- specific. What is taken to be natural or valid in one community may not be common or even acceptable m another speech community (e.g. Basso, 1990; Crago. 1992; Duranti,
1993; Heath, 1986; Philips. 1983; Scollon & Scollon 1981). It is through ethnography, therefore, that we are able to uncover different patterns of communication across speech communities In order to understand one's own ways of speaking, comparison with others is the best way: Only by comparing can we perceive that even "natural" and "logical" communicative behavior is actually culturally unique, a sense of cultural relativism
(Saville-Troike, 1989) It is within such a general framework that the present study is conducted
Applying the method of studying culture to the study of language, EC situates its task in a larger context, sharing with traditional anthropology a concern for holistic explanations of meaning and behavior in a wider framework of beliefs, actions and norms
Its methodology consists of observ ation, asking questions, participating in group activities and, for members from another culture, testing the v alidity of one's own perception against the intuition of NSs. Proposing an ethnography of communication perspective to the study of contrastive rhetoric, Sa\ i!le-Troike and Johnson (1994) suggest a model of
"comparative rhetoric" with a comparative and functional emphasis that incorporates into its analyses and interpretation an internal perspective Such an approach, the authors point out, can significantly enhance validity of interpretations For analysis of natural telephone conversations in both Chinese and English used for this investigation, native speakers" perspectives and interpretations of their sociolinguistic behavior are incorporated. 2 1
In studying conversation, however. EC will strengthen its force if we integrate it with
Conversation Analysis (henceforth CA), particularly the way CA documents talk in action, which will make the data possible for repeated check and scaitiny for further analysis. It will also help keep the focus on the interaction between participants (Goodwin, 1990). My present investigation follows such a methodological approach in that natural telephone conversations are recorded as the data base with social and cultural context of the interaction given full description
An important concern for EC regards the use of taxonomies. Saville-Troike stresses.
"Research design must allow for modes of thought and behavior which may not be anticipated by the investigator" (19S6. p.661) Therefore, preconceived categories, concepts and processes for description can be potentially problematic for they might not accurately represent the communicativ e patterns of the culture studied. .A.s will be illustrated in my analysis, what constitutes phatic inquirie,s, for instance, demonstrates difference between the two languages under study Following the English criteria would be problematic as well as misleading for description and interpretation of Chinese conversations.
2.1.2 Conversation Analysis
Conversation Analysis (henceforth CA) takes a different approach to communication although it shares the same concern with EC with regard to the focus on human knowledge. Emerging within sociology, largely from an ethnomethodological tradition, CA is concerned with uncovering our underlying knowledge as members of the society and how the mechanism of structure operates in conversation. 2 2
Inspired by the realization that ordinary conversation is the predominant medium of interaction in the social world, CA views conversation as a source of much of our sense of social order, and therefore, talk will produce many of the typifications underlying our notions of social role. This basic assumption about the projection of social order through talk leads to the selection of the focus on conversation for study of human knowledge.
Therefore, C.A. intends to discover universal ailes for interaction and sequential structure of talk, and to account for the common-sense knowledge the members have for constructing talk: how participants manage interaction, how procedures are accomplished, and how social organization is dynamically achieved Heritage (1989) discusses four assumptions of
CA approach: (1) interaction is structurally organized. (2) contributions to interaction are both context-shaped and context-renewing; (3) no order of detail in conversational interaction can be dismissed a priori as insignificant or irrelevant, (4) the study of social interaction is best approached through the analysis of naturally occurring data.
For conversation analysts, the assumption that every detail of interaction is potentially significant has led to "a general retreat from premature theor\' construction in favor of a strongly empirical approach" (Heritage, 1989, p 23) With its focus on natural data, conversation analysts have developed their own methodology by recording natural conversation produced by native speakers of English and making detailed transcriptions of events. Taped conversations provide data available for repeated scrutiny and detailed analysis among researchers in a rigorous and formal way Important key concepts for analysis include, for example, adjacency pair, turn-taking, sequential organization, and repair. 2 3
The studies foilowinu the CA model have enriched our understanding of English
conversation structures and rules They have also demonstrated how social organization is
achieved through conversation. At the same time, CA has claimed that there are universal
principles at work in conversations, yet the claim has been challenged for overlooking
cultural diversity in different societies What are proposed as universals such as maxims ot
conversation are, therefore, working hypotheses against which conversational patterns in
different speech communities may be tested and compared rather than as facts (Saville-
Troike, 1987) CA's claim has actually provided a point of departure for further empirical
tests in different speech communities and in various settings. The present study is partly
inspired by the debate on universality and diversity; it intends to investigate the issue with
natural data in the two cultures and languages.
2.1.3 Interactional Sociolinguistics
Building on traditions in ethnography of communication, conversation analysis, pragmatics and related fields, linguistic anthropologist John Gumperz proposes a theory of verbal communication with the goal to develop an interpretive sociolinguistic approach to the analysis of real time process in face to face communication. A central construct of the model is "contextualization cues." including prosodic features, paralinguistic features, and semantic choices, used as signaling devices for "cohesion" and "attitude" (Tannen, 1985).
The aim of interactional sociolinguistics (henceforth IS) is to isolate the differences in behavioral patterns (Wolfson, 1089), to understand how miscommunication occurs and, by providing these insights, to learn how it may best be avoided. Specifically, the goal of IS is to investigate how social and cultural background influences participants' interpretive 2 4
process, how contextualization is realized, and how difference in contextualization may
lead to miscommunication
Gumperz and other scholars (e g Gumperz, 1982a, 1982b; Tyler, 1988; Young, 1982)
have demonstrated empirically through detailed comparative studies of intraethnic and
interethnic encounters that knowledge of contextualization cues is culturally specific, and
interpretive conflicts emerge interactively among culturally (or subculturally) different
speakers (Schiffrin. 1994) In addition, IS illustrates that differences in contextualization
cues can affect the basic meaning of a message, lead to the formation of racial and ethnic
stereotypes, and contribute to inequalities in power and status (Gumperz, 1982a) Tannen
(1984) extends the notion "cross-cultural," maintaining that it encompasses more than
speakers of different languages or from different countries and includes speakers from the
same country of difTerent class, region, age, and even gender, as her analyses of dinner talk
among friends and conversational style of both men and women demonstrate (1984, 1990,
1994),
IS has contributed tremendously to our understanding of cross-cultural
communication From a theoretical perspective, Gumperz's model abandoned the then
existing view of communication which draws a basic distinction between cultural and social
knowledge on the one hand, and linguistic signaling process on the other, focusing on the interplay of language, contextual, and cultural knowledge Methodologically, investigating
the process of interaction enables us to discover shared or not shared meaning by using the reaction that an utterance ev okes as evidence of whether interpretive conventions are shared (Schiffrin. 1994) Some of the data in this study (telephone conversations between 2 5
native speakers and non-native speakers of English) provide further evidence that there are
indeed interpretive conventions that are not shared between two cultures. Providing
analytical means to identity' problematic features at the levels of prosody, paralinguistics,
discourse organization, conversational management, and nonverbal behavior, aspects that
were not identified before, IS not only ascertains conversational style differences across
different cultural and subcultural groups but identifies instances where such differences
become problematic
Interactional Sociolinguistics has been challenged, however, for its failure to take into
account the power paradigm of interaction (Freed, 1992; Singh et. al, 1988), Indeed, it is
important not to lose sight of the social parameter of power in our analysis of cross-
cultural communication; it mav in fact be oversimplistic, in some cases (for example,
Gumperz, 1992), to attribute all problems to intercultural differences in contextualization
cues. Other factors that may hav e atTected the outcome of the encounter (Gumperz, 1992) include social status and attitudes of the interlocutors vis-a-vis each other, social linguistic
knowledge (e g., pleading being deemed appropriate by the Indian speaker but not by the
British administrator), and the inappropriate use of language tor the given situation. What seems to be essential is that we need to examine different dimensions in discourse phenomena instead of a single one because the social reality and context in which language is used are in fact shaped by various kinds of fabrics of the social tapestry.
2.1. 4 Different .Approaches in Perspective
All the three approaches studying verbal interaction discussed above differ in some ways with regard to goals, foci and methodology; while Interactional Sociolinguistics 2 6 studies miscommunication using the native language as criterion in intraethnic or interethnic encounters. Conversation Analysis attempts to uncover common knowledge people share and the rules in operation which provide tor successful communication.
Ethnography of communication, in comparison, builds into its theory' and methodology an intentional openness to discover the variety of forms and functions available for communication and the way they are part of different ways of life, and more significantly, provides a framew ork that is capable of embracing different theoretical approaches such as
Interactional Sociolinguistics and Conversation Analysis (Schiffrin, 1994).
2.1. 5 Brown and V'ule's Theory of Functional Language
Taking a ftinctional approach to language. Brown and Yule (1983) proposes that there are two major fianctions of language: transactional and interactional, corresponding to the
"ideational" versus "interpersonal" distinction of Halliday (1978). The language used to convey factual or prepositional information is transactional language, and it is primarily message oriented. Examples for transactional language include a policeman giving directions, a shop assistant e.xplaining a product, or a scientist describing an experiment.
It is important that the recipient gets the informative detail correct. On the other hand, interactional language refers to the language used in expressing social relations and personal attitudes. Studies on phatic use of language, exchange of turns in conversation, and the saving of face of both speaker and hearer, the authors point out, are all concerned with the interactional use of language 2 7
2.2 Studies on Conversational Interaction
The scope of studies of conversational interaction covers both inter-cultural and intra-
cultural communication. For the purpose of this discussion, 1 will, as a working definition,
define the speech community as a group that shares rules of speaking and interpretation of
speech performance (Hymes, 1972), Furthermore, the same individual may belong to a
number of speech communities such as those based on ethnicity, gender, age, region,
occupation, or class Studies on Chinese conversational interaction will be discussed under
a special section.
2.2.1 Conversational Maxims
Proposing a general principle which participants are expected to observe in their
conversational interaction. Grice (1975) postulates the Cooperative Principle (CP) with the
following maxims as characteristics; (1) Quantity: Be as informative as necessary; (2)
Quality: Be truthful, (3) Relation Be relevant; (4) Manner: Be clear, concise and
unambiguous. However, these maxims are formulated on the specific assumption that the
purpose of conversation is a "maximally eftective exchange of information." CP has defined an unmarked or socially neutral (asocial) presumptive framework of communication (Brown & Levinson, 1987).
Grice's conversational maxims have been proposed to hold universal truth, but have been challenged by studies in different speech communities For example, Keenan (1976) examined conversational maxims and implicatures in the light of Malagasy language, presenting e\ idence that being informative is categorically inappropriate in the Malagasy 2 8 society. Interlocutors regularly violate the maxim of providing as much information as required even though they have access to the information. For example, in answer to a question "Where is your mother'" a respondent may very well say. "She is either in the house or at the market," although the speaker knows clearly where his/her mother is.
Keenan explains the behavior as due to two factors the status of new information, which grants the one with information prestige, and the fear of committing oneself explicitly to some particular claim which might, in turn, incur some responsibilities to the person communicating the information. It is not that the Malagasy people try to be as uninformative as possible Rather. Keenan maintains, they don't have the expectation that in general interlocutors will satisf>' one another's information needs. Yum (1988) argues that to avoid obscurity of expression and ambiguity is not the norm in East Asia (1988, p
384).
2,2.2 Content and Structure
Researchers in the tradition of anthropological linguistics, ethnography of communication, and second language acquisition ha\ e demonstrated that what is acceptable as topics of conversation may not be the same across different cultures. No fixed set of domains can be posited a priori for all speech communities (Saville-Troike,
1989), For example, religion is a taboo topic in .'Xmerican culture, but it is acceptable for
Germans to discuss religion when they converse (Byrnes, 1986). Surveys of NSs of
American English and NNSs (Arabic, Chinese, Indonesian, Japanese and Korean) suggest that topics such as family, classes, grades, and teachers seem to show high correlation 2 9
across cultures while age. money, and personal possessions are topics that receive less
agreement (Hinkel, 1994).
Not onlv do norms regarding what is suitable for conversation var>' across cultures;
the structure of talk may also differ Difficulties for communication sometimes arise not
from what is being said, but from different expectations of discourse convention,
specifically, the order in which messages are presented (Young, 1982). Cooley and Lujan
(1982) analyze twelve public speeches by Native Americans, reporting that across all speeches, implicit relationships between topics can be perceived through their relation to the subject although there are no explicit marking to connect topics. Organization within topics shows a similar pattern with pronouns being used as a cohesive device holding the text together The authors therefore propose that Native .American speeches do demonstrate organizational principles, but these are difTerent from the mainstream
•American rhetorical tradition. The stereotypes of "unorganized" and "rambling" speeches of Native .Americans, the authors argue, are the result of the evaluators' own organizing principles.
Scollon and Scollon (1991) advance the argument that there are actually similar patterns in .Asian and Western communication styles In both, there is a call-answer sequence (for conversational interaction), and in both the caller has the right to introduce the topic. However, what is ditTerent is that "in Asia the facework precedes the introduction of the topic and in the West the facework follows the topic" (p. 116). This is a generalization that needs to be verified on several accounts: first, the general category of
Asian and Western can be problematic: secondly, as this study will show, it may not be the 3 r> case in all circumstances across all speech genres for either Chinese or English discourse; thirdly, natural speech is needed to examine the validity of such generalizations.
2.2.3 Conversation Styles
There are different assumptions in different cultural groups concerning rules of participation in conversation. Scollon and Scollon (I'590) assert that Athabaskans have different perceptions from .-\nglo-.Americans regarding with whom it is appropriate to be engaged in conversation For Anglo-Americans, verbal communication is the best way to establish a relationship, and therefore it is natural to converse with strangers, but this is not the case for Athabaskans: it is improper to engage in a conversation until interactants know each other Stereotypes in such situations might easily ensue with Indians being viewed sullen or uncooperative while .Anglo-Americans are likely to be considered garrulous or even hypocritical In such an encounter, consequently. .Anglo-.Americans will initiate the conversation and control it much more than their .-\thabaskan partner. Related to the above issue is the distribution of talk. In .-Xthabaskan culture, it is the superordinate who is to display while the subordinate is to learn and observ e Quite the opposite, from the Anglo-
American perspecti\ e. it is the subordinate who is to exhibit and demonstrate.
Well-intended con\ersations across cultures sometimes turn awrv' due to different orientation of conversational styles: for example, the information oriented German style versus the social bonding orientation of the American style. Exploring the connection between conversational styles and ethnic stereotypes. Byrnes (1986) asserts that the
German style emphasizes the information-conveying function of language; therefore, overt disagreement and confrontation are ritualized Germans also tend to demonstrate high 3 1
levels of personal involvement and emotional participation in talk. That is why German speech tends to be marked b\' overlapping, loudness, and shorter/no pauses. Americans, on the other hand, tend to show strategies built on deference politeness. Consequently, their conversation is marked by little overlap, lowered pitch, and less intonation contours as talk is more oriented towards social bonding However, as Byrnes" work is based on personal observation and consultation with native speakers, more empirical data is needed to support her analyses Gunthner (1993b) exemplifies the confrontational style of Germans in her study of conversational interaction between Chinese and Germans, and it corroborates some of the observ ations made by Byrnes.
Turn takinu has also revealed differences in conversational styles across cultures.
Comparing the American and Japanese turn-distribution strategies in three business meetings (one Japanese intracultural meeting in Japanese, one English intracultural meeting in American English, and one intercultural meeting in English). Yamada (1990) found
Japanese took short turns and distributed turns relativ ely evenly, regardless of who initiated the topic The .Americans, in contrast, took longer turns, distributed turns unevenly, and the one who initiated the topic typically had the highest proportion of the turn within that topic The autonomy in the American topic organization and the interdependence in the Japanese pattern, Yamada argues, results from the ways the two cultures optimize their cultural strengths, respectively: namely, the individuality orientation versus the collective nature of interaction. It is also found that native strategies are used in
American-Japanese cross-cultural combination by both the .American and Japanese participants. 3 2
2.2.4 The Validity Issue
To ensure validity for research findings concerning conversational styles of different
cultures, we need to collect natural speech and conversational data provided by native
speakers. Examining the studies cited above, we need to address the validity issue. First,
what counts as valid data is our primary' concern. Personal observations (e.g. Byrnes, 1986;
Scollon, 1990) can be usetlil, but we can not rely on anecdotal evidence to draw
conclusions about discourse behavior in general; we need solid evidence for description of
ways of speaking of any given groups. Secondly, elicited speech is different from
naturalistic data and. therefore, we need to be aware of the limitations inherent in elicited
discourse Thirdly, any valid conclusions of con\ ersational styles of a certain language
need to be based on natural discourse provided by native speakers in the native language,
not in a second language
2.3 Chinese Conversational Styles
Studies in interactional sociolinguistics have found that in cross-cultural communication, in spite of the fact that both parties use the same language, difficulties in communication arise due to different styles of interaction among interlocutors including, for example, discourse staictures, discourse signals, e.xpectations of discourse behavior, and conversational styles. Miscommunication not only leads to frustration for the participants involved and failure of the communication of a certain message for a given encounter; more seriously, it incurs stereotyping of a certain culture and the people. Most of the studies of Chinese conversational styles discussed below are inspired by and follow 3 3
Gumperz's Interactional Sociolinguistic model (1982). examining sources of miscommunication in Sino-American interactions.
2.3,1 Discourse Structure
One of the images of the Chinese perceived by Westerners is inscrutability,' which derives largelv from the way Chinese people talk and present ideas. But, in fact,
"inscrutability is often just another way of saying that the unstated, culturally defined expectation which Chinese and Westerners bring to their face-to-face interactions do not coincide" (Young. 1994, p I) Contrary to the American style of talking (and similarly, writing), which is to project the main idea or one's position first in the discourse, the
Chinese people usually establish a common framework first such as reasons, background, and other relevant information before stating the main point (Gunthner, 1993a,
Scollon, 1991, Young,i982, 1994) Young(1982) describes the Chinese "culture-specific notions of acceptable discourse strategies," maintaining that in discourse tasks such as explaining, justifying, and persuading, the organization of the discourse mirrors the
Chinese structure of the sentence (topic-comment) i e . there is "steady unraveling and build-up of information before arriving at the important message" (1982. p. 77). It seems to me that the specific contexts (explaining, justify ing, and persuading) which feature such a discourse pattern, as pointed out by Young, is significant, it suggests such discourse structure may not be representative of all Chinese speeches for all situations
It is assumed that Chinese speakers have transferred some of the speech patterns and discourse expectations in English discourse from their native language (Young, 1982),
Nativ e speakers of English, on the other hand, used to a clear statement of thesis at the 3 4
beginning of the discourse, consequently experience difficulties in both locating the most
important point and how the information is stpjctured in their interaction with Chinese.
Scollon and Scollon (1991) describe the Chinese style as inductive as compared with
the deductiv e style of the Western pattern of discourse, supporting Young's hypothesis that the ordering of ideas is the source of stereotypes of the "inscrutable" Asian. Scollon and Scollon further argue that Westerners will generally assume "the first thing said by the caller after the answer will be the main topic" (p 116) whereas for Asians the main point can be discussed later While the Westerners feel the last thing discussed is of little significance, the Asians consider the last thing most important As a matter of fact, it is
"customary to summarize what has been said before departing" (1990, p.289). The outcome is that both parties "ascribe different values to the items" discussed (1991, p. 1 17),
In addition, Scollon and Scollon (1990) posit that instead of prosody, the Chinese use a different system of conversational traffic signals - the particles which indicate speakers' attitude as well as ways in which responses are expected.
To account for the reason for the Chinese discourse strategy. Young (1982) interviewed several native speakers of Chinese and summarized a number of "divergent assumptions" about the appropriate linguistic beha\ ior. It seems to me that their answers are not as divergent as \'oung percei\ es. Scollon (1993) proposes that such a pattern is the
"outcome of face relationships between the speakers and the grammatical or discourse structures which facilitate this interpersonal position are the ones chosen preferentially" (p.
65). I would suggest that the themes are in fact closely interrelated; to secure and retain listenership (or to pre-empt opposition), to minimize social confrontation, and to present 3 5 oneself modestly, which is the acceptable and appropriate way to present oneself as well as a more effective wav to attain success for the given communicative tasks as specified.
2,3.2 Issues of Coherence
The use of conjunctions in English discourse by Chinese has been discussed in several studies as one of the major sources of miscommunication for native speakers of English
(Gunthner, 1993; Scoilon. 1993, Tyler et al, 1988; Tyler & Bro. 1992, Young, 1994).
Tyler et.al (1988) studied Chinese and Korean teaching assistants' talk and found that syntactic miscues, along with prosodic and lexical miscues, caused major problems of comprehension of the discourse for .A.mericans rather than the ordering of ideas as hypothesized by Young (1982). Tyler and Bro (1992) fiarther tested this hypothesis by comparing original and reconstRicted versions of discourse excerpts of Young's study The findings suggest that the perception of incoherence might be better understood as the cumulative result of "discourse structuring miscues." such as problems with logical connection (syntactic incorporation and lexical discourse markers), specificity, and tense/aspect marking. The ordering of ideas, on the other hand, may not be the primary source of problems for comprehension.
Scoilon (1993) discusses in detail the high frequency of the use of and, but, and because in the English discourse of a native speaker of Chinese The data being based on a segment of an recorded English conversation, Scoilon notes that not only is the Chinese speaker's use of conjunctions much higher than that of the English native speaker in terms of percentage, they are otten functionally misplaced For example, ^ is used in additive function and and as an adversative Furthermore, those conjunctions in sentence initial 3 6
position make it hard for native speakers of English to infer the logical or hierarchical
structure of the discourse, creating a coherence phenomenon called "cumulative
ambiguity" (Scollon. 1993)
Discussing the reasons for the overuse of conjunctions by Chinese speakers, Scollon
summarizes three as have been advanced; the training effects from early education or
gatekeeping in English examinations, carry-over of discourse/rhetorical structures of
Chinese, and possible influence from written language (if a sentence-initial conjunction is
used more in writing)
It should be pointed out that the studies mentioned abo\ e are based on English
discourse of Chinese speakers Comments such as "confusing" and "ambiguous" certainly
articulate the perception and frustration of native speakers of English clearly, but they are
logical and valid only in the context of English as a second language, from the perspective
of the NSs of English. In fact, such terms and concepts are problematic and ethnocentric
(Saville-Troike & Johnson, 1994) Actually, speakers of other languages might perceive
the American style to be simple, or confrontational, judging from their perspectives.
Furthermore, granted, it is important to identify problems for miscommunication but we
need to locate sources of problems and address these issues in order to reduce
miscommunication Therefore, studies of natural Chinese conversation by native speakers
in Chinese is required; assuming LI transfer into L2 does not provide valid evidence, nor does it offer a solution to the problem The fact that this conjunction phenomenon is an L2 discourse feature is crucial; attempts to draw conclusions about the conversational styles of 3 7
any given culture need to be supported by analysis of natural discourse provided by native
speakers of that language
2.3.3 Strategies for Disagreement and Agreement
Avoidance of open confrontation has also been suggested as one of the features of
Chinese discourse Comparing the Chinese style with the German style in the talk between
NSs of German and NSs of Chinese speaking German as a SL, Gunthner (1993b) describes
the Chinese style as very "cooperative and consent-oriented" Gunthner observes that the
Germans highlight and focus on disagreement, using contrastive elements and prosodic
cues, for example, to mark emphasis such as "you" and "my," "problem" and "no
problem," and "equal" and "unequal." On the other hand, the Chinese in the interaction
temporarily signal formal consent, and yet in the following turn indicate a discordant
position without formally marking it as a disagreement For example, a native speaker of
Chinese is cited as saying the following in German "and and also 1 also think the way of
thinking of women and of men "(Gunthner, 1993b, p 18) Gunthner argues that the use of
the additive conjunction and together with the particle also suggest the speaker's consent
with the previous speaker's opinion while the speaker is in fact expressing disconsent.
Therefore, the Chinese is perceived as expressing disagreement without formally marking
disconsent.
It is clear that the Chinese style as demonstrated through the discourse of the NSs of
Chinese is not as cont"i-ontational as that of the German participants, yet it is only relatively
nonconfrontational compared with the German style Furthermore. Gunthner's observation about the Chinese signaling "formal consent first" is not accurate, from my point of view. 3 8
The and at the beginning of the above cited utterance by the NS of Chinese is used to mean something to the effect of moreover, and it is verv' likely to be a continuation of the speaker's own previous statement rather than a thematic progression of his German interlocutor's position since he has often been interrupted by his German interlocutor. The conclusion of a "consent-oriented " style may therefore not be an accurate description of the Chinese style.
While it is true that a non-confrontational style is adopted to some extent, Gunthner is correct in cautioning against the generalization that confrontation does not exist in Chinese discourse. As a matter of fact, one of the important factors, as Gunthner observes, is the relationship between interlocutors. It is face-threatening for Chinese to get involved in open confrontational discourse among acquaintances. Gunthner rightly notices, because such behavior is considered a lack of limao "politeness" On the other hand, it is almost unheard of for Chinese people to be engaged in serious debate about political or social issues among new acquaintances, let alone with acquaintances who are introduced through some of their mutual friends .As a matter of fact, the context of Gunthner's study belongs to precisely such a category, and for this ver\- reason, the nature of the context and the relation between the participants largely constrain the display of confrontation for the
Chinese. To the Chinese, it will be a loss of face for their mutual friend, not just themselves, if the meeting turns out to be unpleasant (for the Chinese, open confrontation constitutes such a condition) Therefore, it is not just the conversational style at play, but social and cultural values shaping the discourse as well On the other hand, it is not uncommon to dispute openly on these issues within solid relationships (in the family or 3 9 among good friends or complete strangers), I would argue. Moreover, there are other factors which might have enlarged the differences between the conversational styles of the two cultures and created a picture with sharper contrast than it might be in other circumstances, such as unequal relationships of LI versus L2 language competence and native speaker versus non-native speaker social status
What is without dispute is that native speakers of German apparently display a style of aggressiveness in their argument It seems to me that even if the Chinese had wanted to present his ideas more forcefull\, he hardly had the chance. This accounts for the reason why he had to continue his elaboration of argument whenever he had the chance, but not at once. The transcript shows he v\as interrupted by his German conversational partners constantly.
One of the striking differences between NSs of German and NSs of Chinese reported in the study by Gunthner (l9Q.ia) is the use of minimal responses during their conversation in German. In her data. NSs of German produced mhm and ]a on a regular basis after information phrases. NSs of Chinese, on the other hand, hardly displayed any minimal responses. This resulted in German speakers' repetition and e.\planation. mistaking the absence of minimal response as lack of understanding. Similarly, talks between NSs of
Chinese are often long passages without backchannel tokens. Tao and Thompson (1991) report findings that backchanneling in Mandarin conversation is less frequent than in
English conversation. As the data base is relatively small, no firm conclusions about backchanneling behavior for Mandarin in general is drawn based on the study. (Gunthner's study will be discussed more in detail in the section on LI and L2 interplay.) However, part 4 (I
of the findings from the corpus for this present study based on telephone conversations
between Chinese females will suggest that backchanneling indeed occurs frequently in
Chinese conversation interaction
Comparing the discourse of Americans conducting peer review in English with
Chinese carrying out the same task in Chinese in college writing classes. Sun (1995)
reports that all the Chinese participants in the study evidence a feature of discourse
collaboration which I call co-construction. That is, the interlocutors complete the speaker's
unfinished utterance, a phenomenon not observed in the comparable English data.
According to the Chinese participants I interviewed, such interaction between the speaker
and the listener demonstrates understanding and collaboration between interlocutors.
However, due to the small size of the corpus and considerable difference between
individual participants in terms of frequency of such behavior, no general conclusion is
reached. The observ ed phenomenon awaits a larger corpus of data for further
investigation
2.3.4 Inside vs. Outside Relations
It has been proposed by scholars in fields of sociolinuuistics. communication. sociology, and psychology that communication in ingroup and outgroup relationships varies systematically by the degree of individualism-collectivism in a culture. One of the distinguishing characteristics of collectivist culture is that ingroup and outgroup are sharply delineated (Wheeler. Reis& Bond. 1989; Gudykunst, Yoon & Nishida, 1987). Ingroup includes co-worker and colleague or classmate while outgroup includes, but is not limited to, interactions with strangers People in individualistic cultures tend to be universalistic 4 I and apply the same value standards to all In contrast, people in collectivist cultures tend to be particularistic to members of their ingroups and outgroups. Furthermore, they perceive greater social penetration in ingroup relationships than do members of individualistic cultures, and they tend to disclose more within the group Consequently, harmonious relationships with members of the ingroup are essential, but for outgroups, these are of lesser consequence
Discussing the impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communications in East Asia. Yum (1988) states that human relationships under
Confucianism are not universalistic but particularized; ethics are not applicable to the larger society as a whole but based on relationships and situations of the context. Mutual dependence is part of the prescribed Confucian principle, and one's affiliation and identity with a relatively small and tightly knit groups of people over long periods of time is verv important Therefore, there are "elaborate social interaction patterns" (p. 379) and a moral code for relationships among known members To the Chinese, it is of great importance to discover for oneself one's proper place in human relationships (Chang & Holt, 1994).
Making a distinction between the inside and outside relations and their discourse patterns for these relations in the Chinese society. Scollon and Scollon (1991) observe that there are actually "two separate cultural patterns" (p. 118), two opposing patterns governing communication. As has been observed, there is the inductive approach which defers the introduction of the topic until after a considerable period of small talk. In contrast with cautious deference, there is a discourse style that demonstrates no deferential 4 2
politeness at all What sets these discourse apart is the nature of the relation -- inside vs.
outside relations
For inside relations (which can derive from relationships from family, employment, or
school experience), there is much small talk, or extended facework in which the mood and
attitudes of the interlocutor are gauged Once the interactants have established their
relative positions, the topic may be introduced along with its sense of imposition
Interactions with outside relations, in contrast, feature a completely different style In
service or business encounters between customers and clerks or service people, for
instance, discourse can be direct and open, beginning with the topic "Three airmail stamps"
or "I want to pay this bill," with no face work taken into consideration. "By comparison,
the Western service encounter is a rather elaborative affair" (Scollon, 1991, p. 119).
Westerners" assumptions of egalitarian communicative relations is reflected in discourse,
but vertical social relations may be fairly said to be the core of Confucian thought.
Conversations with strangers in Chinese society are therefore somewhat rare (Scollon
1991).
The distinction between inside and outside relations is important in understanding the different patterns of interaction for Chinese. However, there has been no study that uses
recorded natural speech to support such a distinction Studies from sociology and
psychology rely mostly on questionnaires, and Scollon and Scollon's work regarding inside and outside relations is based on personal observations. 4 3
2. 4 Telephone Conversation
As one of the media for human communication, telephone conversations share many of the features of talk in other settings, such as turn taking, repair, and word choice
(Schegioff, 1979) Nevertheless, there are still ditTerences from other means of verbal interaction: it is "in the overall structural organization of a conversation - in its opening and closing - that the distinctive characteristics of various types" of conversation may most prominently appear" (p. 25)
2.4.1 Opening Sequences
Telephone openings seem to be formulaic and "routine" However, they are not pre- scripted nor automatic utterances Routine openings, Schegloft'postulates, must be understood as "outcomes jointly achieved by the participants out of a field fijll of alternative possibilities" (1986. p. 144) For researchers, educators, and learners of second languages, the author rightly points out that the study of telephone conversations is especially meaningful
Scheglotf (1968, 1986) identities four adjacency sequences accomplished by the participants at the beginning of North American telephone conversations: summons/answer, identification, greeting, and howarevou sequence. Each of these sequences addresses at least one important organizational issues for the conversation. The first sequence addresses the issue of the openness of a channel of communication w hile the second addresses the identification issue. The greeting sequence puts the parties into what
Goffman (1963, cited in Schegioff, 1986) has called "ratified mutual participation". The 4 4 howareyou sequence shares some features of greeting, addressing the current state of the recipient, and makes an answer a rele\ ant next turn
The first sequence is the summons/answer sequence. What is Hello'j' It is not a greeting primarily; rather, it is an answer to summons (the ring), a response, and the second part of the adjacency pair, it shows that "a channel is open and ear and mouth are ready"
(Schegloff 1986. p 123). In addition, it also confirms to the caller the right number has been reached, and enables voice recognition for those who can by providing a voice sample. The reason that it is used in the first answer slot for telephone conversation openings. Hopper and Doany (1989) explain, is that the hello may retain some greetinglike character for face-to-face interaction, "something like a "pre-greeting function""(p. 173).
However, its primary function as an answer to summons is evidenced by the fact that there are routinely other greetings in later sequences ScheglotV(1986) makes it clear that there are other forms of answer to the summons: for example, self-identification. These forms
"constitute types, or classes of types, of conversation" (p. 121) In particular, the self- identification or self-formulation as a response is most conventionally understood as a
"business" or "office" form.
The identification/recounition sequence is a "distinctive shape" which is not found in face-to-face conversations (ScheglotV. 1979). ScheglotV examined callers" first turn (the second turn in the call) in 4.'>0 calls, and found all of them addressed the identification/recognition issue, whether it is in the form of greeting (Hi./Hello / presumed answerer's name in interrogative intonation contours (Susan2). or presumed answerer's name in terminal intonation contours (Susan.) or other types of response. Even 4 5
switchboard requests, for example. Is Mary there, or Can I talk to Jane please, in fact
address the identification/recognition issue because by asking for another person, the caller
has established the recognition that the answerer is not the intended party to which the call
is made.
The callers" use of first turn of a greeting term alone or greeeting plus an address term,
according to ScheglotT, claims that he/she has recognized the answerer, and it invites
reciprocal recognition from the single typical small turn it constitutes. While an assertive
address term constrains its recipient to use the same, the interrogative name or "try-
marked" address adds to the possibilities "confirmation" and "disconfirmation +
correction". It is therefore a more "tlexible" instalment in allowing but not requiring
deferral of recognition of a caller, thus operating as a "presequence", or pre-self-
identification.
Summarizing systematic features of the organization for recognition. Schegloff (1979)
notes that self-identification by name is less preferred than recognition by inspection from co-participants As an interactional accomplishment, recognition consists of both resources and the solution. Recognition resources include inspectables such as voice, appearance,
behavior (talk), and self-reference (name) These are graded with the first name as basic, or middle point. "Less than" is from minimal voice sample to some clues such as jokes while
"more than" refers to fijller forms of names and recognitional depictions. "Recognition from least possible recognition resources sensitive to recipient design is preferred" (p. 64); thus, using lowest grade for recognitional resources to secure an "effortless" recognition solution is preferred 4 6
Greetinu constitutes one of the core sequences in the opening. "An exchange of
greetings is the regular form for the accomplishment and display of reciprocal recognition
or satisfactory reciprocal identification"" (ScheglotT, 1986. p. 129). A prototype greeting
term, ScheglotT notes, is Hello. Hi. or Hiva. Sometimes, however, it is not used as a
greeting in cases such as Hi. Carla'^ (usually in the second turn) That is because there is
often a full greeting in later sections such as Hi. Bernie, for example. Therefore, the
greeting term in the second turn in such cases is not used as a greeting. There is a
constraint on the use of greetings. ScheglotT further maintains -- "one per party per
occasion, if reciprocated"" (p 128) Discussing situational variations that might result in different verbal interaction in telephone conversations. Hopper (1992) proposes that phone calls between strangers feature reduced format: i.e . both greeting and initial inquiry are omitted. For intimate relationships, on the other hand, telephone openings are responsive to easy recognition, recency, and other factors. .As will be discussed in the analysis, calls between strangers in both Chinese and English indeed show a reduced format.
The Howareyou sequences are "ordinarily an exchange sequence"" (Schegloff. 1986. p. 130). They are used as "state-checks preliminary to tlirther talk"" (Hopper & Doany
1989, p. 175). ScheglotT further suggests that there are positive, negative, and neutral responses to the sequence, but ditTerent types engender different sequential courses (1986).
While responses such as OK or tine are neutral and "closure relevant"" (not to be pursued now), positive ones (such as terrific) or negative ones (awful, terrible) invite sequence expansion and prompt a request for an account of the state announced. 4 7
Common as they may be, "howareyous are not relevant or appropriate for some
parties of interlocutors", ScheglofF points out (1986, p 141). This is an accurate
observation as there are instances of phone calls which contain no Howareyou sequences.
Unfortunately, the author stops short of giving the readers further explanation as to when
howareyou is "not relevant or appropriate" Although Scheglotf claims that this issue of
relevance of Howareyou only atVects a few cases, and "should not affect our understanding
of the underlying organization of the openings" (p 141), it is of significance to scholars and
practitioners in the field of comparative discourse studies, sociolinguistics, pragmatics,
second or foreign language researchers, educators, and learners
Schegloff (1986) explains the sequential relationship of sequences: there are two
modes of organization for those sequences: serial organization and interlocking
organization. In serial organization, each turn includes one sequence part. In interlocking
organization, on the other hand, some turns have two or three components, combining the
last part of one sequence and the first of the next There are interactional consequences for
either compressing or stretching the opening sequences. The interlocking structure shortens the potential length of the opening by one turn, changes the assignment of the turn for initiating the subsequent sequence, and eventually the speaker to whom the anchor
position is assigned. In other words, who gets to raise the first topic (Schegloff, 1986).
Summarizing the multi-function of openings, Schegloff (1986) posits a base position for the introduction of the first topic This base position is what he calls the "anchor position", the position after the standard set of core sequences, although the last
Howareyou may not be present Ordinarily, it is initiated by the caller (or initiator of the 4 8
contact in the case of a return call) to introduce the reason for the call. However, not all
telephone conversation openings display all the sequences in the order described. Some are
more compact with more interlocking; sequences; others are shorter due to voice
recognition without overt identification sequences There are also cases when one of the
participants moves to "preempt control of first topic, and, with it, potentially the shape of
the rest of the conversation" before the opening has worked itself out in fijll (Schegloflf
1986, p. 117). Schegloft'(1986) tlirther points out that the content of those preemptive
moves have some priority in common: for those recipient initiated topics, they are either
apology, complaints, or contact-related. For the callers, it is either apology or matters of
urgency On the other hand, sometimes the first topic gets raised after the anchor position
is passed, but ScheglotTdoes not elaborate on this pattern.
2.4.2 Closings
Scheglotf and Sacks (1973) propose that closings are achieved as "solutions to certain
problems of conversational organization" (p. 290) There are at least two issues that are
addressed: the use of adjacency pair as terminal e.xchanue for lifting transition relevance
and the placement of the initiation of closing.
The initial problem for closing, ScheglotTand Sacks (1973) argue, is how people coordinate the con\ ersation at a point where "one speaker's completion will not occasion another speaker's talk, and that will not be heard as some speaker's silence" (p. 295). .A.
pro.ximate solution, they maintain, inx olves the use of a terminal exchantze composed of conventional parts, eg, an exchange of good-bves. an adjacency pair. "By the use of an adjacency pair format, a place could be marked in a string of utterances in such a way that 4 9 on its completion the transition relevance of utterance completion might be lifted. The second part of a terminal exchange was proposed to be such a place" (p. 299). The production of two adjacent utterances by difterent speakers, the authors argue, will show that the next speaker indeed understood what the first one aimed at, and that he/she is willing to go along with that Meanwhile, the first speaker can see what he/she intended to do was understood and accepted.
Summarizing the features of adjacency pairs. Schegloff and Sacks assert that there are five characteristics: (I) two utterance length, (2) adjacent positioning of component utterances, (3) different speakers producing each utterance. (4) relative ordering of parts, and (5) discriminative relations Furthermore, the rule of operation is that on hearing the first part of the pair produced by the first speaker, the next speaker should start and produce a second pair part from the pair type of which the first is recognizably a member
Schegloff and Sacks (1973) propose the adjacency pair principle for telephone conversation closings However, analysis of the Chinese data in the present study shows that the characteristics of the adjacency pair outlined by Schegloff and Sacks do not all apply to closings in Chinese telephone conversations. Briefly, leave-taking may not be (and in fact is often not) of two utterance length, varying from one turn to multi-turn sequences, depending on the relation and distance between the participants
The placement of the initiation of closing sections is the other issue. Much as the use of an adjacency pair as a terminal exchange provides collaboration between and mutual consent by coparticipants. the closing of a con\ ersation requires more than negotiation and 5 « cooperation at the terminal exchange Proper initiation of closing is therefore a crucial component for a smooth termination of the conversation.
There are several ways of initiating a closing section. Schegloff and Sacks note: possible pre-closinu. closing down a topic, topic bounding, overt announcements, and caller's techniques or called's techniques. The first way to initiate a closing as noted by the authors is pre-closinu. or possible pre-closing, vshich takes the form.s of We-ell.. . OK. ..
So-oo (with downward intonation contours) and others Since these utterances can also occur in conversation in capacities other than that of pre-closing. they operate as possible pre-closings only when placed at the analyzable (to participants) end of a topic. The authors suggest possible because by taking up the tloor but not initiating a new topic or a topically coherent utterance, the utterance suggests the speaker is to pass the opportunity for bringing up new topics and it is up to the next speaker w ho has the option of either beginning a new topic or rendering a return pass echoing the pre-closing intention.
However, the possible pre-closing becomes the first exchange of the actual closing section if the first OK (for instance) is answered by another OK from the interlocutor. That is to say, it is only when the participants to a conversation lay no further claim to opportunities for opening up new topics that the potential of the possible pre-closing may be realized. Hence. Schegloff and Sacks have made a distinction between pre-closing and the actual closing section.
Proposing a leave-taking view for the uoodbve exchange based on their study of routine inquiries of telephone calls in American urban setting, Clark and French (1981) argue that the exchange of goodbye does not terminate conversations per se as Schegloff 5 1
and Sacks suggest. It is to implement and complete the reaffimiation process for
interlocutors who are acquainted before the telephone conversation. Yet this process is
optional if the two parties involved are not acquainted. However, Clark and French report,
if either party reveals more information about themselves or if the caller feels more
appreciation for the information received, he/she will be more likely to extend goodbye
Whereas the possible pre-closings "may be said to accomplish or embody a warrant for
closing", there are techniques that "announce it" (ScheglotTand Sacks, 1973, p. 3 11).
Therefore, with regard to the position of these utterances, overt announcements can be
used to interrupt a topic, w hile pre-closing is usually placed after the closing down of a
topic. A most prototypical example of overt announcement is a statement such as 1 gotta go. There is another difference between pre-closings and overt announcements. One feature common to all pre-closings is that they make no reference to the particular information derived from the conversation. On the other hand, the overt announcement may use the specific information de\cloped in the conversation and makes reference to it for closing down the topic Routine questions such as What are you doing'^ and How are you feeling'^ can elicit materials that may be used at the end of the conversation in warranting its closing, Schegloff and Sacks observ e For instance. Well, I'll let you get back to your books
In addition to the distinction between the possible pre-closings and overt- announcement of closings, the authors point out that there are also specific caller's technique and called's technique. The caller's technique makes reference to the interests of 5 2 the other such as Well I'll let chu uo Similarly, the called's technique makes reference to the caller such as This is costing you a lot of money.
Closing sections can. once initialized, be accomplished by a terminal exchange and nothing else But it can contain many more components and often does. Possible component parts for closing sections, Schegloff and Sacks suggest, may include "making arrangements" (such as giving directions, arranging later meetings, invitations),
"reinvocation" of things talked of earlier in the conversation, the reason for initiating the conversation, and the signature of the type of conversation (e g Thank you). However extensive the components might be. the proper initiation of the closing section and the terminal exchange are the tw o caicial components for any proper achievement of closings, the authors conclude
2.4.3 Cross-cultural Studies
The study by ScheglotTand others and the claim of universality of organizational sequence has inspired a number of cross-cultural studies on telephone conversations in
Arabic, Dutch, British English, French, German, Greek, and Swedish. Differences as well as similarities have been observ ed in those studies which shed light on the issues of what is common and what is culturally specific for telephone conversations.
Many studies report that telephone conversations begin with answers to summons as the first sequence as in French, Egyptian and Greek calls. (Godard, 1977; Hopper &
Doany, 1989; Schimidt, 1975, cited in Schegloff, 1986; Sifianou, 1989) Nevertheless, it is not the case with Dutch (Houtkoop-Steenstra, 1991); neither is it always the case in
Swedish telephone calls (Lindstrom, 1994). In Dutch calls, the first sequence is 5 3
overwhelmingiy self-identification by name in answerers" first turn, a very different practice
from that of the Americans If Hallo (the Dutch equivalent of Hello) occurs, it usually
occurs along with self-identification within the same turn In other words. Hallo may or
may not be present but self-identification is the standard response to summons. Therefore
in Dutch, answer to summons (assuming answer/summons sequence is indispensable) is not
realized in a separate sequence as in the American pattern; rather, self-identification of the
answerer serves the dual function of providing the answer to the summons and self-
identifying. a very efficient way for communication, it seems In Swedish telephone
openings, the majority of the Swedish answerers either self-identity' by name or with their
number in their first turn.
It is proposed that the types of speech objects produced (interactively) during
telephone openings is universal "Hello, then, has some cross-cultural status as a response
to a summons" (Hopper & Doany 1989. p 160) However, the token Hello which is the
typical form of answer to summons for American telephone calls made to a residence does
not share the same characteristics in some of the languages studied (Arabic, French, and
Swedish) as Hello in English. This dilTerence is e.\emplified in Chinese, and will be discussed in detail in the analysis section. "Swedish Hallo and English Hello are different
interactional objects, notwithstanding their lexical 'esemblance"" (Lindstrom. 1994, p. 241).
Unlike in English, "to use Hallo as an address term is somewhat rude" (p.241), and its equivalent in English will be Hev vou. Thus Hallo is solely used either as a summons or as a response to summons Similarly, in Arabic and French, alio is restricted to telephone talk and hardly ever occurs in face-to-face encounter (Hopper & Doany, 1989). 5 4
In addition, Sifianou (1989) points out that in Greek, there is a variety of linguistic options for answering the phone, unlike in British English (Sifianou's study is a comparison
between British English and Greek telephone conversations), which features only a few set expressions such as Hello or Yes The variety of responses, Sifianou postulates, affords the
Greek callers the opportunity to guess correctly the answerer's identification, and thus
reduces the need for overt identification
While Schegloff proposes that Hello as an answer to summons is the equivalent of the availability to be engaged in a conversation, for French people. Godard (1977) contends that there is no such equi\alence Hello only stands for "the answerer's availability to be interrupted in the middle of what he was doing, not of his availability as a partner in a conversation" (1977. p. 217). The assumption made by the French callers is therefore "call will disturb" (p 217), and that is why it is necessary to transform the summons into a polite request. On the other hand, calls in the U S. seem to be attached with a "positive value" (p.
218), the openings are "much more direct", and "the caller has the right to make what use he desires of this efficient means of communication" (p. 219).
Schegloff s sequential model has been challenged by cross-cultural studies. Godard
(1977) argues that openings in French telephone conx ersations indicate a difference in the rules of speaking, particularly regarding identificatiorb'rccounition. Unmarked calls in
French (other than calls for business or intimate relationship) feature the following sequential tasks; caller checking for the number reached, caller self-identification (even before the caller asks for the intended addressee) and caller excusing him/herself Godard explains that in French, it is impolite not to self-identify' when one makes a call to a private 5 5
residence. Illustrating the difFerences with an example of the socialization process, Godard further explains that children are instructed to excuse and identify- themselves when the
person answering the phone is not the intended addressee, which is not the norm in the
U.S.
The Egyptian data collected by Schmidt (1975. cited in ScheglofF, 1986) seem to suggest that instead of asking for a particular person when the caller is not able to recognize the person who answers the call, the caller asks Who is speaking, a question to which the recipient does not respond What ensues is a question Who are you addressed to the caller by the recipient in turn .After both parties fail to elicit identification from their interlocutors with explicit inquiry, the name for the requested person is given and recognition is achieved This pattern of interaction is substantially different from that of the
American exchange, and suggests difterent cultural norms for identification sequences as well as for interactional behavior
A significant difference observed in Greek telephone calls from the English ones is that
Greek callers tend not to identify- themselves on the telephone, even when the intended person is not available. Instead they will say, I'll call back some other time. They seem to assign the obligation to call back to the caller, w hich justifies the lack of identification and explains why messages are not passed on Questioning a caller's identity sounds improper or even odd (Sifianou. 1989) However, it will be uncommon in England not to identify oneself Callers who omit this information may be asked to identity themselves Findings in this study suggest similarity between the Chinese and the Greeks in that some Chinese 5 6 callers do not identifv' themselves by name if the intended recipient is not in, even if they are asked for their identity
Whereas ScheglotT observes that Americans prefer recognitional identification, Dutch callers display a marked preference for explicit self-identification and it is accomplished in the first turn by the recipients of the calls Moreover, in the Netherlands, voice sample recognition is restricted to relations such as spouse or close relatives. The cultural expectation of appropriate behavior is to identify oneself when first answering a call
(Houtkoup-Steenstra. 1091) The Swedish data, however, present a mixed picture: what seems to be similar to the American data, Lindstrom (19Q4) observes, is that about half of the callers withhold explicit self-identification e\ en though the answerer has identified him/herself and this is not restricted to spouse or close relatives only. This shows, the author contends, the Swedes also avail themselves of the recognitional resources that are utilized by Americans. On the other hand, the majority of the Swedish answerers either self-identify by name or with their number in the first turn, which is not evidenced in the
American data.
Most of the studies on telephone conversations are focused on the summons/answer and identification/recognition sequence, and therefore, they do not go beyond the first few sequences (such as Houtkoop-Steenstra. 1991, l.indstrom, 1994) with two exceptions
One is that of Sifianou (1989), who is concerned with both verbal openings and attitudes concerning telephone usage in general. However, her study is criticized for lack of empirical support. The other exception is the study by Pavlidou (1994), who focuses precisely on the talk after the summons/answer, the identificationyrecognition sequences. 5 7
and the phatic exchanges prior to the discussion of the main purpose Consequently, not all
the studies have examined the Howarevou sequence in telephone conversations
Pavlidou (1994) provides a comparative study between telephone conversations in
Greek and German on phatic utterances, examining Brown and Levinson's politeness
theory within telephone conversation as a whole speech event Focusing on the part of the
telephone conversation which comes immediately after the opening sequences such as
summons/answer and identification/'recounition, Pavlidou's study attempts to investigate
the occurrence of utterances such as How are vou and their relation to the whole speech event. Other than the cross-culture comparison, relationship (personal, familiar, or formal) and reason for calling (practical vs social) are explored as two possible variables.
The data show Greeks use phatic utterances more frequently than Germans do for both social calls and calls for practical reasons. On the other hand, there is a negative correlation for Greeks and no correlation for Germans in terms of the relationship between phatic sequences and beneficiary of the calls. Using Brown and Levinson's theory to account for the data seems to be inadequate and even problematic when phatic talk is related to the imposition of telephone calls. In spite of the fact that telephone calls carry more weight as an imposition in the German society. Germans use much less phatic talk in telephone openings than Greeks The reason, Pavlidou suggests, is that Germans seem to minimize the imposition of the call by being brief tor the w hole speech event instead of being indirect (negative politeness) or using phatic utterances (positive politeness).
Pavlidou concludes by characterizing the differences in the norms of the two cultures: 5 8
'"Greeks emphasize more the relationship aspect of communication whereas Germans have a stronger preference for the content aspect" (1994. p 508).
2.4.4 Universality Versus Diversity
One of the fundamental issues scholars and researchers are concerned with is the issue of universality versus diversitv Holding a universal position. Hopper and Doany (1989) postulate that "telephone conversations are much the same the whole world over—at least in terms of the problems the speakers face and the sorts of speech objects produced
(interactively) during telephone openings" (1989. p. 158) Such a claim has been seriously challenged, as discussed before; it does not hold true based on cross-cultural evidence.
Proposing a canonical model which "reaches for cross-community generality". Hopper
(1992) maintains that summons/answer sequences are necessarv' first occurrences for all telephone conversation, and mutual recognition displays are the first-next-business in-and- after summoning/answering. Further, greetings are relevant between previously acquainted persons immediately after recognition and initial inquir\' concludes the opening. ""Each of these statements describes a canonical value, and di\ ergence from these values, which are commonplace, mark situational adaptations" (p 87). .Although the sequences of the telephone conversation openings are claimed to feature fixed order, the Chinese data suggest differences from the English data in that the sequences do not always follow the same pattern Instead of concluding the opening, initial inquiries might precede identification on some occasions.
According to Hopper (1992), difterent cultures may differ in the format or sound in telephone openings, and such variation is similar to marking of circumstances and 5 9 relationship, neglecting the fact that cultural diflerence is based on some patterned behavior of the whole community rather than on individuals or circumstantial factors For
Hopper, divergence from routines often occurs due to situational variations including circumstance, relationship, and culture. The categorization (culture as a sub category under situation) itself is problematic and disputable, but it is not the focus of my present study
Hopper makes a distinction between two views on situation, called extrinsic-context and intrinsic-to-message variation The former is considered to be the result of independent factors that shape or constrain messages (e g sex or cultural background) while the latter, which Hopper emphasizes and identifies with, studies situations by inspecting how partners adapt to features of local occasion.
Nevertheless, disciplinary orientation does not necessitate neglect or playdown of evidence suggesting otherwise Discussing Sifianou's study (198Q), Hopper questions the cross-cultural interpretation, asking, gi\ en that diversity within a country is common, which of these differences are best traced to culture alone. Yet even w hen studies show there is difference across cultures, for example when the Dutch data show self- identification during the summons-answer sequence. Hopper argues it is not a phenomenon unknown in the U.S and he compares it to the case of the North American institutional setting in which answerers state their name in the first turn. But these are different types of situations; the Dutch data are based on domestic calls while Hopper is comparing them to calls to businesses. When the two phenomena are not comparable, there will be little validity for the conclusion. 6 0
Challenging the universal position, Houtkoop-Steenstra concludes that interaction of
telephone openings is "a matter of both local and cultural variation." Similar arguments are
presented by Godard (1977) and Sifianou (1989), who propose that the nature and
structure of telephone conversation differ across different cultures Houtkoop-Steenstra
maintains that people who do not self-identify in Dutch society are considered impolite, for
example, but it will not be the case in the U S for personal calls Furthermore, if Greek
callers do not provide names to the interlocutor when the part> requested is not available,
their interactional behavior might be judged unfavorably when they intend to be polite and
to take the initiative to call back. Godard's work has been criticized (Schegloff, 1986;
Hopper & Doany. 1989) for lack of empirical support. Hopper and Doany (1989) report
that their recordings "do not match Godard's description in some details" (1989, p. 164).
However, it is not clear in what aspects the two studies share similarities or vary and what
"some details" are because the authors offer no further explanation.
Moreover, while a Conversation Analysis approach typically is concerned only with
the organizational issues in telephone conversation, sociolinguistics. comparative discourse
studies, and second language research are interested in many other issues beyond, but not
excluding, organization. To know the core sequences of a conversation in a given language
is significant but is not all that is needed for successful communication, not to mention
second language communication. It is not adequate to find organizational similarities and
differences; we also need to explore the hows and whys so that second language learners
will be able to effectively and appropriately apply the rules of speaking to specific situations 6 1
2.4.5 Calls for More Empirical Investigation
Calling for empirical investigation and criticizing some studies for lack of evidence,
Schegloff (1986) stresses that the issue of what is common and what varies for the
organizational sequence of telephone conversations across different cultures is in need of
evidence "What constitutes a canonical opening set of sequences is an empirical question"
(1986, p. 141) "If there are differences, that is important to know, and to investigate -
either for w hat else in the organization of conduct may motivate those differences, or for
what yet more general account of the organization of conduct will allow us to treat the
varying practices as orderly alternatives" (1986. p. 147) Similarly. Hopper emphasizes the
need for "cross-cultural testing" which is "vital to evaluating this claim" of universality
(1992, p 85)
In terms of the issue of validity and methodology of research, one of the problems or
weaknesses of the study by Hopper and Doany (1980) Is that there is no mention of the
data base, such as how many participants provide the corpus, how many calls are made,
and the context under w hich the calls are recorded, which relates to the reliability issue.
Moreover, participants" length of stay in the U S. might be a factor that needs to be taken
into consideration. In other words, w e do not know if the participants' first language is
possibly affected by their interaction with nati\ e speakers of English in the U.S. These are
issues that need to be addressed to ensure validity of the interpretation and reliability of the data. 6 2
2. 5 The Interplay of LI and L2 in Conversation
Studies on first and second language interaction has been undertaken by linguists,
sociolinguists, psycholinguists, pragmaticians. and practitioners As this study is primarily
focused on the contrast between L1 and L2 in \ erbal interaction, I will limit my discussion
here to language use and pragmatics. Research on the interaction of first and second
language, however, has mostly focused upon the influence of the native language on
second language, with the exception of studies on attrition. Such an orientation is largely
due to the fact that studies have evidenced that unsuccessful communication quite often
results from inappropriate use of the second language based on first language influence
Transfer from native language has been investigated and documented in syntax, lexicon,
and pragmatics.
2.5.1 Pragmatics in Language Learning
The significance of pragmatics in learning and using a second language is underlined
by research findings that pragmatic competence does not necessarily develop in a parallel
fashion with linguistic advancement (Zuskin, 1993, cited in Cohen, 1996). Thus, learners
might be seriously impacted in a negative way. considering the fact that the consequence of
pragmatic failure can be more detrimental than lack of linguistic competence. Takahashi and Beebe (1987) advance the hypothesis that L2 proficiency is positively correlated with
pragmatic transfer because more developed proficiency would allow advanced learners to draw on the pragmatic knowledge of their LI While their own study does not support the 6 3 hypothesis, some other research findings have provided evidence (e.g. Blum-Kulka &
Olshtain. 1986).
The importance of pragmatics for L2 learners is attributed further to observations made by researchers repeatedly that pragmatic failure (failure to encode illocutionary force of an utterance or failure to follow conventions for interaction in the given language) has more serious consequences than linguistic errors, partly because grammatical or phonological deviations from the target language (henceforth TL) is easily recognizable
(e.g. Thomas, 1983) Generally, advanced learners' linguistic fluency will lead NSs to expect concomitantly high pragmatic competence, inappropriate use of language will therefore more likely to result in learners' personality, attitude, or cultural identity being judged negatively Pragmatic failure can be divided into two types: pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic (Thomas. 1983) The former refers to the inability to understand or encode appropriately the illocutionarv' force of an utterance due to unfamiliarity with the resources of the TL, w hile the latter concerns not follow ing conventions governing interactions due to unfamiliarity with TL norms
2.5.2 Interaction of LI and L2 Conversational Styles
One of the perceptions regarding the interaction of L1 and L2 is that conversational style is more resistant to change than other aspects of language and interaction. Tannen's study (1981) on the level of indirectness of Greeks compared with Americans suggests that conversational style is more resistant to change than more apparent marks of ethnicity such as the ethnic language Tannen concludes that it is possible that one may have lost his/her parents' or grandparents" language, but the communicative strategies may be retained. r> 4
Scollon and Scollon (1990) state that Chinese interactional patterns may persist even for those overseas who do not speak Chinese.
It is reported that in cross-cultural interaction between participants that feature a different conversational style, interactional behavior such as backchanneling is carried over for some participants (Japanese) but not for others (Americans) The study by White
(1989) uses conversational data to empirically examine backchanneling behavior of
Japanese and Americans White found that while Americans altered their listening style in the direction of their nonnative interlocutors, the Japanese participants" backchanneling behavior remained the same in cross-cultural conversation as in their native language.
Therefore, conversation style is carried over for Japanese participants, but not for
Americans as native speakers The converging style of the Americans is attributed to an accommodation phenomenon (Ferguson. 1975, Giles, 1975) Americans use more backchannels to encourage the less fluent non-natives to talk
One question White raises concerning the direction of change in discourse behavior
(for native speakers in this case) is whether the change is always toward the increase of backchanneling even with cultures in which rate of backchanneling is lower This is an important question as it addresses the issue of w hether it is possible to undo or control one's discourse behavior (as opposed to add certain features or to make the feature occur more frequently), assuming the speaker intends to do so. It seems to me that we may extend this question to other aspects of discourse behavior in conversation and to native speakers as well as non-native speakers. In other words, what conditions may promote discourse behavior change and what might be constraints that limit such change These 6 5
questions are potentially important for study of second language acquisition, pragmatics,
and sociolinguistics, and for classroom teaching
2.5.3 Influence of L2 on LI
Studies on first language transfer into second language performance have informed
second language teaching, but research on influence from the second language to the native
language, on the other hand, is scarce. With regard to interlanguage, Blum-Kulka and
Sheffer (1993) point out although there have been some studies on attrition, they use the
first language as the criterion norm and examine to what extent and in what manner
language loss (the loss of the linguistic code) manifests itself over time as an
intergenerational phenomenon
Addressing the issue of the influence of the second language on the native language,
Tao and Thompson (1991) report their findings of backchanneling behavior in Mandarin speakers, comparing backchanneling behavior in Mandarin and English. They observe that
bilingual speakers whose second language has become the dominant language have
unconsciously adopted the strongly American-English communicative habit of frequent
backchanneling, complete with clusters. English backchannel words, and the characteristic
English continuer function. The authors conclude that the study provides evidence of second language influence on native language. Moreover, they propose that for bilinguals. pragmatics may be the realm where the transfer effect is most salient, and the ability to use backchannel as native speakers do could be one of the first skills a bilingual loses when the first language ceases to be dominant. 6 6
2.5.4 An Intercultiiral Style: Two-way Interference
In her previous work. Blum-Kulka (1991) reports that Hebrew-English bilingual families manifest a bicultural or intercultural style systematically different from both the
Israeli and American patterns. For example, for requests, immigrant families demonstrate a more direct style than Americans but a less direct one than Israelis Furthermore, this feature is realized regardless of the language spoken, either the native language or the second language Supporting Tao and Thompson (I99I), Kasper and Blum-Kulka (1993) propose a hypothesis of bi-directional transfer for bilinguals fully competent in two languages, maintaining that an intercultural style may be created Blum-Kulka and ShefFer
(1993) propose that language contact creates bi-directional etTect. not just one way. As a result, the mutual influence between two sociolinguistic systems for those bilinguals under study led to the emergence of a specific, pragmatic interlanguage which is different from both English (native language) and Hebrew (second language).
Focusing in on the possible two-w ay interference of native and second language for pragmatics. Blum-Kulka and Sheffer (1993) examine metalinguistic discourse of bilingual families (immigrants) in Israel who are in contact with two incongruent pragmatic systems.
Metapragmatic comments include three subcategories: talk regulation, maxim violation, and metalinguistic comments. The findings show that inter-group diversity is confirmed in pragmatic norms: the marked difference between American and Israeli culture is demonstrated through Americans" emphasis on conversational behavior and Israelis' attaching more importance to language as a topic For immigrants occupying an interim position between the tw o groups, the metapragmatic discourse of the families differs in 6 7 systematic ways from both the American and IsraeH families, whether using a first or second language.
Blum-Kulka and ShetTer argue that "interlanguage pragmatics can be realized in the first language" (p 198). the hypothesis posited by Tao and Thompson (1991) and reported above that pragmatics may be the first area affected by exposure to the sociocultural influence of the second language In addition. Blum-Kulka and Sheffer maintain that pragmatic systems can be bi-directionally transferable, from LI to L2 and from L2 to LI, resulting in a "hybrid style of the bilinguals [w hich] constitutes a prime example of interlanguage pragmatics" (1993, p 219).
The studies discussed above provide insights as well as raise important questions for issues related to the interplay between L i and L2 However, only few studies (such as
Yamada, 1990: Blum-Kulka & Sheffer, 1993) ha\ e investigated synchronically the manifestation of conversational style in both languages (nati\ e and second) for speakers of more than one language and possible transfer of pragmatics in both directions. It is partly the purpose of this present study to undertake these tasks. 6 8
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
As stated in the Introduction, the purpose of this study is multifold: First, it aims to describe and analyze the way native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of American
English construct telephone conversations, particularly with regard to the way they open and close, and the way they present purposes of calls Secondly, it attempts to compare similarities and differences between Chinese and American conversational telephone styles.
Thirdly, this study empirically examines the validity of the distinction betw een interactional and transactional language use both within a language (Chinese and English) and across the two languages Lastly, it intends to explore the interplay of the native language (Chinese) and the second language (English) by native speakers of Chinese in conversational telephone interaction.
3.1 Dimensions of Comparison
This is a comparative study following the model suggested by Saville-Troike and
Johnson (1994) with both intra-cultural and inter-cultural (cross-cultural) investigation of the two languages The triangulate design (Chinese in China, Chinese in US, and
Americans in U.S.) will enhance the validity and interpretation of the study.
As is recognized by an increasing number of scholars and researchers working in sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, and conversation analysis, valid descriptions of conversation styles derive from studies of natural speech collected in natural settings by native speakers To ensure reliability and validity of the findings, it is also important to consider the possible interplay effect of native language and second language if the 6 9 participants speak and use a second language frequently or if the data are not collected in a native language setting. Therefore, in order to obtain accurate descriptions of Chinese conversational styles, we need to investigate the interactional patterns of the native speakers of Chinese in China instead of simply relying on the data provided by native speakers of Chinese in the U S. Such a design will provide a control group to enable us to examine if the data obtained in the U S are similar to patterns observ ed in China and if
Chinese participants in the U S display any influence from the second language in their native language discourse.
As shown in Table 3.1, this study involves several dimensions of comparisons: it will examine telephone conversations (1) in two settings (China and the U.S.), (2) in two native languages (Chinese and English), (3) in English as first and second language, and (4) in two different functional categories (interactional vs. transactional) 7 (»
TABLE 3 1
Dimensions of Comparison
Dimension Comparison
Settinu China > US.
Language Chinese(Ll)' > English(Ll)
Language English(LI) ^ > English (L2)
Function Interactional ' > Transactional
Note.
CC - CA (Chinese in China vs Chinese in America)
CC - AA (Chinese in China vs Americans in America)
AA - CAE (.Americans in .America vs Chinese in .America speaking English)
I - T (Interactional vs Transactional)
The first dimension for comparison involves comparing the Chinese data provided by
native speakers in the U S (C.A) with the Chinese data prox ided by native speakers in
China (CC), a comparison of two settings: China and U.S. .As the participants in both
groups share the same native language, if there are salient interaction patterns for the CA
group that reveal significant variation from the CC group, we need to examine the effect of
the social and cultural settings for the C.A group in which the interactions take place. Such
a comparison of the settings will enable us to investigate the influence of the setting on
language use and variation, and Hirther our understanding of how language reacts to and is shaped by the society and culture in w hich language exists, functions and evolves. 7 1
Cross-language and cross-culture comparison (Chinese versus English) constitutes the second dimension. Taped telephone conversations by both nati\ e speakers of Chinese in
China (CC) and native speakers of American English (AA) provide naturalistic data upon which sociolinguistic accounts of telephone conversational styles of both Chinese and
English will be offered The descriptions will contribute to studies of sociolinguistics and comparative studies of conversational interaction in general. Descriptions of conversational patterns of both Chinese and English data will enable us to make comparisons between the two groups, and characterize the similarities and differences as revealed in the interactions, particularly with regard to opening, closing and presentation of purposes in telephone conversations.
The third dimension for comparison involves native language versus second language.
I will compare English telephone calls made by the Chinese speakers in .America (CAE) with those English calls made be native speakers of American English (AA). The comparison between two sets of English data will demonstrate the e.xtent to which the
Chinese speakers have acquired linguistic and sociolinguistic competence in their telephone conversations It \sill reveal for us, at the same time, the areas in which non-native speakers demonstrate salient differences in either language choice or pragmatic interaction from native speakers and. possibly, the interplay between tirst and second language in conversational interaction These revelations, it is hoped, will shed light on the development of communicative competence, and be relevant to the teaching of conversational skills in particular. In addition, findings regarding the interplay between first and second language will contribute to knowledge of second language learning in general The fourth aspect of comparison is focused on the distinction between interactional
versus transactional calls All recorded calls are to be categorized into one of three general
categories; Interactional calls (hereafter I calls). Transactional calls (hereafter T calls), or
Interactional-Transactional calls (hereafter 1-T calls) Although the distinction proposed by
Brown and Yule (1983) is dichotomous - interaction versus transaction, it is necessary,
based on the needs of the data, to add the category of Interaction-Transaction for the
present analysis. This is due to the fact that many calls fit neither the pure interactional nor
the pure transactional categor\: rather, these calls constitute a distinctive type
I calls in this study refer to calls made to family members, friends, relatives, or acquaintances for social interaction vvithout specific objectives. T calls include calls made to businesses, services, or institutions to request information, order services, make reservations, or schedule appointments. I-T calls co\ er calls that are in-between the interactional and transactional categories, and in fact, comprise the majority of the calls in our daily lives as well as in the calls recorded. These are calls made to recipients with whom the callers are acquainted prior to the calls Yet, these calls are not made for social interaction only; callers have specific matters to discuss, yet the calls feature clear interactional components
Distinguishing telephone calls according to difterent categories will enable us to examine empirically the validity of the interactional \ ersus transactional theoretical construct If there is such distinction manifested in the data, it is necessary to examine how the differences are distributed and in what ways In addition to the comparison within both
Chinese and Enulish lanuuaues. we want to examine the distinction cross-culturally That is 7 3 to say, we attempt to investigate what is shared or not shared between Chinese interactional calls and English interactional calls. Similarly, vve w ill examine if there are characteristics of Chinese transactional telephone conversations that are in common with
English transactional telephone conversations
3.2 Participants
There are eighteen participants participating in my study with whom I am personally acquainted Six of them are native speakers of English, six are native speakers of Chinese who are residing in the L .S at the time of my data collection, and another six are native speakers of Chinese who are residing in Shanghai. China. This distribution of participants is summarized in Table 3 2.
TABLE 3.2
Participants
Participants Number
Chinese speakers in China (CC) 6
Chinese speakers in U S (CACAE) 6
English speakers in U S (AA) 6
Total 18
In order to reduce possible \ ariables, only female participants are invited to take part in my study The age distribution of participants ranges from thirty to fifty. With regard to participants' educational background, native speakers in China range from high school 7 4
graduates to advanced degree holders (Masters degree) The American participants, on the
other hand, are ail graduate students studying in a Ph D program in a Southwestern
University The third group of participants consists of native speakers of Chinese who are
presently in the U S either as students or residents. Their educational background varies:
two with high school diplomas, two with Masters degrees, and two in Ph D. programs
Generally speaking, as three groups, the participants' educational background and
occupation place them in a relatively homogenous social class
As the focus of this study is on telephone conversation, it is important to take into
consideration participants' pre\ ious experience with telephone communication to ensure
the validity of the research. The use of telephones in the U S is common, but not for many
people in China. Based on my personal acquaintance with the participants and the questionnaires filled out by participants in China. I concluded that all of them had
considerable e.xperience with the use of telephone - between fifteen to twenty years. In addition, all of them ha\ e had telephones installed at their residence for four to six years.
The estimated average number of calls each person makes on a daily basis is about five to six calls. Therefore, all the participants in China are experienced telephone users. Similarly, my Chinese participants in the U S had considerable experience with the use of telephones before they came to the U S
All the participants in China are natives of Shanghai and the language spoken at home is Shanghai dialect. But they all speak Vlandarin and some of them speak Mandarin often at work. For the native speakers of Chinese in the US. three are from Shanghai while the other three are from other major cities in China . They have been staying in the U S. for 7 5 different length of time: some of them have lived in the U S. since 1990. while one of them has been in the U S for only about two years Their English proficiency varies, too Three of them speak English fluently while the others can communicate in English but are less fluent. However, as the focus of this study is not on intra-group but inter-group variance, the difference in their English language proficiency is not considered a serious problem
In the transcriptions and analyses presented in this study, pseudonyms for individuals and businesses are used for anonymity
3.3 Database
The corpus of this study consists of 267 natural telephone calls made by the participants from their residence. The data can be subdivided into four groups: (1) phone calls in Chinese as a native language made by Chinese speakers in China (CC), (2) phone calls in Chinese made by native speakers of Chinese in the U S (CA), (3) phone calls in
English as nati\ e language by nativ e speakers of American English in the U.S., (AA), and
(4) phone calls in English as a second language made by native speakers of Chinese in the
U.S. (CAE) The distribution of telephone calls is summarized in Table3.3. 7 6
TABLE 3 3
Recorded Database
Groups Number of calls
CC 58
CA 60
AA 109
CAE 40
Total 267
The telephone calls recorded in Shanghai. China are mostly in Shanghai dialect with a few in Mandarin, depending on the language spoken by the recipients. Those recorded in the U.S. by native speakers of Chinese are either in Shanghai dialect or Mandarin recorded in two cities in the L S : one in the Southwest and the other in the West.
3. 4 Data Collection
3.4.1 Types of Data
Data in the study consist of the following; recorded telephone conversations, interviews with participants, diaries kept by the participants for the telephone calls recorded, and questionnaires for the Chinese participants in China. Follow-up interviews were conducted after the initial analyses with participants in the U S to elicit information on observed patterns, and to determine perceptions of likely cross-cultural similarity. 7 7 differences, and difficulty Participants in China were consulted by mail for issues of significance
In addition to recording telephone conversations, all participants were asked to keep a
"diary' for the recorded phone calls, entering relevant information in the diary such as names of the party called, their relationships, and the purposes of calls. The participants in
China, in addition, also completed a questionnaire which solicited information about their educational background and jobs along with information concerning their experience with telephone use. Furthermore, the questionnaires elicited their perception of the differences and similarities between calls to businesses and calls to acquaintances.
3.4.2 Procedures for Recording
Natural telephone conversations were recorded from participants" individual households by the participants themselves. Only calls to female recipients and calls initiated by my participants were recorded. In the case of transactional calls, as there was no way to pre-select the gender of the recipients, only calls that w ere answered by females or calls intended for female recipients are used as data.
In order to obtain as natural data as possible, recipients of the calls were informed of the purpose of the recording only at the end of the conversation, and it was at their discretion whether to authorize or deny the use of the recording (not the case in China, which will be explained later) The decision that recipients of the calls would not be informed at the beginning of the calls is made based on the need to obtain natural data
Since openings and presentation of purposes are part of the focus of the study, it is crucial that the beginning of the telephone calls and its sequences be kept as natural as possible. 1 7 8 am aware of the sensitiv ity that may be involved for the recipients, but this is offset by the availability of the option left open for the recipients to decide either to authorize the use of the recording for this study or deny it if she so desires If the latter happens to be the case, the caller would immediately erase the recording without providing it as part of the data.
For the recording in China. [ asked my participants to make decisions regarding the need for and the manner of informing recipients of the recording The reasons for such an approach is based on considerations of legal, ethical, and validity issues. First, in China, there is no law concerning the recording of telephone calls and therefore, disclosure is not necessar\'. Secondly, in China, empirical sociolinguistic study is rare; asking for permission to record telephone con\ ersations is unheard of Therefore, it might bring unsettling feelings and unnecessary anxiety to recipients of calls who do not know me personally in addition to not being familiar with such sociolinguistic practice Considering the fact that the Chinese people have unfortunately experienced many eventful periods in the past and many have suffered tremendously in the political and social turmoil, the caution they might display in their conversations is perfectly understandable Thirdly and most importantly, as
I am asking for the support and help from my participants who are well acquainted with me , it is both ethical and appropriate to let them decide what they are comfortable with rather than prescribing to them what needs to be done regarding this issue. They are living in China now and they know what works best for them and the recipients of their calls 1 respect my participants as well as their judgments in the handling of the issue completely.
In fact, it turns out that most of the recipients of the calls in China are people that 1 am acquainted with as well, w hich reflects the appropriateness of my participants' decisions 7 9
3.4.3 Recording Equipment and Time Span
Telephone conversations were recorded with a telephone call pickup attachment
which is pressed onto the upper hand position of the back of the receiver
The collection of data took a total often months for the eighteen participants. Most
participants had about two weeks, during which time their calls to female family members,
friends, relatives, and acquaintances, as well as calls to businesses, were recorded. There
was no specification as to how many calls they were to record, but within the two weeks or
so, they were to record as many phone calls as they thought appropriate and possible.
However, due to unexpected circumstances (sickness or schedule problem) for a few
participants, the recording took much longer The collection of data in China, however,
was done in a speedy fashion due to the fact that the recordings had to be brought to the
U.S. at a certain time following the traveling schedule of my friends who graciously
assisted me in the collection of data. Therefore, each participant there had only about ten
days for recording.
3. 5 Analytic Procedure
3.5.1 Procedure
I first listened to each call to get a general impression of the nature of the call as well as its content. At the same time. I checked the diary provided by the participants and made a note of important features such as the purpose, relationship, and category (to be explained in detail below) Then, rele\ ant parts of the conversation would be listened to repeatedly and transcribed with the focus on opening, closing, and the presentation of 8 (I purpose of calls Some initial coding was marked in the transcript to indicate moves such as opening, closing, presentation of purpose, initiation of closing, and leave-taking to highlight major moves in the calls. In the case of calls in Chinese, conversations were transcribed in Chinese characters first and then translated and transliterated with romanized pinyin.
After most of the data for the same category- was transcribed. I entered the content, sequences, and ditTerent moves of each call into preliminary' tables according to different sub-categorization (variables) The tables provide an etTective way to reveal patterns (or non-patterns). In cases when the tables could not reflect important features in the data which emerged, then restructuring and revising of the tables was done on an inductive basis
- from data to categories Based on what seemed to be characteristics of each group. I then proceeded with the w riting up of the preliminary analysis, describing what was observed in the group as a pattern, and what was observed to be variance When description for each group was completed. I moved onto comparisons, first within the group (such as interactional vs transactional calls) and then across the languages
Transcriptions were checked by each participant to the extent possible while she listened to her own recorded phone talk. I conducted interviews after the initial analyses with participants, seeking their explanations about observed patterns and their perceptions of similarities and dirterences betv\een languages (for Chinese bilinguals) and between different types of phone calls (for all participants in the U S ) Participants' account of why they talk in a certain way on a certain occasion, and the values they attach to different ways of speaking are incorporated into the analyses, providing insights on both Chinese and 8 I
American cultures and explanations for sociolinguistic behavior demonstrated in telephone conversations.
3.5.2 Categorization
Categorization of the data into Interactional, Transactional, and Interactional-
Transactional groups is the first step With a general label for each call, calls belonging to the same group are analyzed together and coded into the same table so that if there are patterns, thev will become more salient and observable
3.5.3 Variables
In addition to the categorization of the ditVerent types of calls, there are three possible variables that might affect participants' sociolinguistic behavior in their conversations: the nature of the call, the role relationship betw een the participants, and the social distance between caller and called. These variables therefore deserx e in\ estigation. However, for T calls (regardless of which language group), it is assumed that no further sub-categorization within each language is necessary as all the calls generally share the same features such as the nature of the calls, the relationship between the caller and called, and the social distance between them.
I calls, on the other hand, share some features in common. That is, they are all made to express callers' concern, care, friendship, interest, or empathy, so they are of a similar nature - not to achieve a particular objective but to get in touch with the party called, to maintain and build social relations. In addition, generally speaking, the social distance 8 2 between the caller and the called is minimal The only major variable for interactional calls is the social status Therefore, tor interactional calls, role relationship is a possible variable
Compared with T calls and I calls as groups, I-T calls seem to be more complex with all the three variables as potential factors that might atTect the actual communication behavior The first variable is the nature of calls, in other words, in whose interest is the call made The second variable invok es the role relationship If the caller is the daughter of the recipient, the status of the mother is relatively higher in a Chinese context. Yet if the recipient is a subordinate at work, the caller is considered to have more power With friends and sisters, the role relation suggests equal status. The third possible variable is social distance. As a general rule, there is relatively little distance between intimate relations or close friends, and only slightly more distance between colleagues, but the distance increases in cases of interaction between strangers.
It should be pointed out that for all three \ ariables, a continuum would definitely be a more accurate indicator However, as these are only possible variables for investigation which may or may not manifest themselves in conx ersations, and as these are assessed by the investigator relativ ely subjecti\ely, a general classification seems to suffice for the present study. It is also important to note that all the variables discussed may not manifest themselves in the same way nor impact communication to the same extent in different cultures. Therefore, what constitutes a weighty favor, who has more power vis-a-vis whom, and what is the social distance between the participants in a given situation can be culturally different All the variables are therefore only possible factors worth examining. 8 3 but we can not assume that what is valid in one culture can autom.atically be translated into another culture.
3.5.4 Analytic Models
For this study, there is not a single model for all the analyses to tbllow. Instead, I have used several different models for ditTerent dimensions and levels of analyses. Two basic models consist of Brown and Yule s (1983) distinction between interactional and transactional talk and Gumperz's model (1982) for inferential process of conversational interaction Other models that are used include ScheglofFs (1968; 1986) core sequences for telephone openings. Sack's and ScheglotTs (1973) model for closing, and Pavlidou s
(1994) model for phatic utterances Some of those models will be incorporated with some modifications such as Sack's and ScheglotFs model (1973) for closing and Pavlidou's
(1994) model for phatic utterances.
Sack's and Schegloft"s (1973) model for closing examines terminal exchange, possible pre-closing. and placement and accomplishment of initiation ofclosinsi. However, the terminology leave-taking is used in the present analysis instead of Sack's and ScheglofTs terminal exchange because the application of the latter term to the Chinese data has caused significant problems in the initial analysis. In addition, pre-closing is defined as well as coded difterently in the present study from the way it is used in Sack's and ScheglofTs analysis. In Sacks and ScheglofFs analysis, the emphasis is on possible. Moreover. linguistic forms such as Well. OK. and So-oo which constitute the entire utterance are perceived as possible pre-closings by the authors. In the present study, nevertheless, pre- 8 4
closing onlv refers to referential utterances, for example, ril let vou uo. which are intended
to terminate the conversation yet unsuccessful due to the continuation of talk. Such a
Pavlidou s (1994) model for phatic utterances in Greek and German telephone calls
includes the following categories: addressee's state, lack of contact, wishes, caller's
intrusion, modalities of the telephone call, use of V-form, and phatic particles. Following
an inductive approach, I used the data collected as the basis for categorization. I modified
Pavlidou's ta.xonomy and divided phatic utterances into two broad categories in my study:
phatic utterances that are concerned with the addressee's state or phatic utterances that
address the relational aspect. Such modification of both models is necessary due to the
need for accurate description and meaningful analysis of the Chinese and English data
collected in this study
3. 6 Method of Transcribing Data
There are man\ ways researchers transcribe natural speech and the chosen method for each investigation is shaped by specific research objectives. .As is suggested by Ochs
(1979), transcription itself is the result of a filtering process, foregrounding some aspects of data and backgrounding others. As this study intends to examine verbal interaction within and across languages only at the levels of content and discourse staicture,
phonological variation is not captured, nor are prosodic features such as intonation, pause, pitch, speed, and \ olume transcribed Comparison of these features might be interesting for future research. 8 5
The transcription convention adopted in this study is based on the system developed
by Jeflferson with some moditlcations A detailed explanation for transcription convention
is included in Appendix A. Coding principles are explained in Appendix B Appendix C
lists the table of contents for the transcripts. Appendix D provides selected transcripts
As for the transcription of the Chinese data, a four-line-transcription sequence is used
for each utterance: the tlrst line is the utterance in Chinese recorded in characters, the
second line provides the phonetic symbols in Pinyin (Romanized phonetic symbols), the
third line carries the word-for-word translation in English, and the fourth line presents the
free English translation. Selected segments of the conversations from all participants are
included as Appendix B
3. 7 Terms for Coding
3.7.1 Opening
OP in the transcripts stands for opening, marking the verv tlrst turn at the beginning of
the telephone conversations between interlocutors However, in the analyses, opening (to
be distinguished from statement of purpose and closing) refers to the section which may
consist of a number of sequences at the beginning of the telephone conversation including answer to summons, identification/recognition, and phatic talk.
3.7.2 Phatic Utterances
PH refers to phatic utterances that address the interiocutors' well-being in general or the rapport between the interiocutors Specifically, phatic utterances include reference to the addressee's state, the present activity the addressee is engaged in, the possibility of 8 6 disturbance resulting from the call, the contact between the interlocutors, and good wishes for the addressee In the transcripts, only phatic utterances prior to the presentation of purposes are coded and presented for the purpose of comparative analysis. Nevertheless, the occurrence of phatic utterances is not limited to the beginning section of telephone conversations; neither is my analysis only focusing on its occurrence in the beginning of the telephone conversations In fact, the phatic utterances in closing are examined in this study as well, but these are not included in the transcripts.
3.7.3 Statement of Purpose
SP is the short form of statement of purpose, indicating the position where the caller presents her reason for calling. Whether it is an interactional, interactional-transactional, or a transactional call, each call has some purpose With the exception of a few return calls, purposes for calling are clearly expressed
3.7.4 Pre-Closing
PC refers to pre-closinu which is a term borrowed from ScheglotTand Sacks (1973).
Yet it is given a new defmition in this study which is substantially difterent from that used by the authors In ScheglotTand Sacks' analysis, forms such as Well, OK, and So-oo are perceived as possible pre-closings. In the present analysis, however, pre-closing only refers to expressions that convey referential meaning Moreover, these expressions are intended to lead to a close of the telephone conversation by either interlocutors prior to initiation of closinu (see below), yet the execution is not successful due to the introduction of a new topic or some other remarks that do not directly lead to closing of the talk. 8 7
3.7.5 Initiation of Closing
IC stands for initiation of closing. In order to code the data in such a way so that the linguistic forms can be compared and analyzed, an utterance, if it is coded, only belongs to one major category according to its primary function in the context: an utterance is coded as initiation of closing according to its structural position if it is perceived as the linguistic form that marks otTthe actual closing section In other words, it is not the semantic meaning that determines whether a particular utterance should be coded as pre-closing, initiation of closing, or phatic It is its function in the text that determines the coding.
Therefore, for example, a Thank you can be either coded as initiation of closing if it initiates the actual closing section or phatic utterance if it is not in the structural position of
IC.
Granted, such codification is arbitrary and may simplify- language use sometimes, and I am fiilly aware that in reality, one utterance can and often serves more than one Hinction.
However, a comparati\ e study requires some taxonomy that will encompass and account for different forms in the two languages under study. Furthermore, as my focus is primarily content and structural analysis, some codification oflinuuistic utterances as well as identification of functions and structural positions such as initiation of closing become necessary. .As for the multi-fianction of a given utterance in a given language, although it will not be covered in the present study, it is a potential topic for future investigation.
While many English expressions for closing conv ersations entail phatic themes, some most often used Chinese expressions for closing, for example, "So much for now' is free of phatic themes In order to make valid comparisons between the two 8 8
languages, phatic themes, if entailed in initiation of closings, will be disregarded if the
utterance is coded as initiation of closing Thus, an expression such as I'll see vou
tomorrow will not be considered as entailing a phatic theme if it is coded as the initiation of closing.
3.7.6 Leave-taking
LT stands for lea\ e-takinu, refering to the last exchange of utterances or last
utterance(s) (if not an exchange) in the conversation. It usually takes the form of Good bye, Bye-bye or Bye in English telephone conversations. In Chinese, it is I'j- IaL, literally
'see again", translated as "Good-bye" or "Bye-bye" in English
3.8 Terms for Analysis
3.8.1 Greeting by A
A"s greeting includes initial answers such as li[<. {'\^k\. "Hello" or "May 1 help you"'^
Expressions such as Thank you for calling in English are also considered a greeting in addition to functioning as self-identitlcation. As there are in some cases two openings for one call, only the second opening in which the caller talked to the intended recipient is analyzed to exclude other more extraneous variables
3.8.2 Greeting by C
Greeting by C varies from Hi, Hello, Yes, or Excuse me in English In Chinese, it is
(or lit" in few cases), meaning "Hello." 8 9
3.8.3 Acknowledgment
Acknowledgment refers to A s utterance in various forms such as Hi, "Yes'
or "Hi" in reply to the greeting
3.8.4 ArTirming A's ID by C
This refers to either asseni\e address or ""tr\-marked" address (Schegloff, 1979) with
interrogative intonation contour It also includes forms such as Is this Susan'!' But inquiries
such as Is Susan there'!* or requests such as Can I speak to Susan'!* are not considered
belonging to this categorv
3.8.5 Caller self-Identification
Since only the second opening is analyzed in calls with two openings, calls in which
the caller s identity is revealed in the first opening is subtracted from the total percentage.
In other words, these calls are excluded from the tabulation of either the total percentage
of the calls or the occurrence or non-occurrence percentage in the present analysis.
3.8.6 Phatic Utterances for Opening
Phatic utterances in English calls consist of expressions such as How are you or How
are you doing In Chinese. howe\ er. phatic utterances cover a wide range of linguistic
forms. For example, we have {'\-{\\ |H'J'!'"What are you doing'!*" |"| "So you're
back?' "Who do you think I am'!"" | home just now !•' Judging from the perspective of a native speaker of American English, it might be dubious if these expressions can be considered as phatic Nevertheless, from a 9 (» Chinese perspective, these expressions do ser\ e a phatic function for interaction as will be explicated in more detail in the analyses 3.8.7 Phatic Litterances for Closing Utterances that address one of the following themes are considered phatic: future contact, expression of gratitude, enjoyment of conversing with the addressee, good wishes, or regards to family A special note is necessary regarding the use of Thank you. When used as a reply to phatic comments. Thank you will not be identified as a phatic expression, only as a response. For example, a Thank you in response to Have a good trip will not be considered as an expression of gratitude in the present analysis. 3.8.8 Siniiiltaneoiis Initiation (of either closing or leave-taking) Simultaneous initiation only refers to utterances of the specified linguistic content (Thank you or Bye respectively for each category) that either overlap or are produced simultaneously by both parties Howe\er. if one party's Bve overlaps with the other party's Thank you. this is not coded as simultaneous leave-taking (nor closing) because technically speaking, only one party is doing leave-taking. In short, this research intends to conduct comparisons along four dimensions including setting, native language, first language and second language, and function of language. The methodological approach that I followed for this study is an inductive one. Furthermore, it is not a single theoretical framework that is used; ditTerent models have been used, some with modifications The database consists of natural telephone conversations recorded by participants. In the next chapter. I will present content and structural analysis. 9 I CHAPTER 4: CONTENT AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS The content and staicturai analysis chapter is divided into four sections in the following sequence telephone conversations by native speakers of Chinese in China (CC), telephone conversations by native speakers of American English in the U S (AA), telephone conversations in Chinese by native speakers of Chinese in the US (CA), and telephone conversations in English by native speakers of Chinese in the U.S. (CAE). Within each section, we w ill examine opening, statement of purpose, and closing in terms of both content and stmcture. Content analysis entails the examination of linguistic forms through which opening, statement of purpose, and closing for each type of calls are realized, the particular interactional context of the calls such as the nature of the calls, the role relationship between the participants and their social status, and the cultural context in which the linguistic forms are embeded and in w hich conversations take place. The dimension of structural analysis attempts to investigate what constitutes the essential and optional elements for each type of calls within CC, A.A, CA. and C.AE groups. .Although both content and structure will be discussed, the analyses will be presented in an integrated manner rather than separately 4. I Telephone Conversations by Native Speakers of Chinese in China The number of telephone calls made by native speakers of Chinese in China totals fifty-eight. .A.II the calls were recorded in Shanghai, a major metropolitan city with the largest population in China. A further breakdow n of the calls provides us with the following number with regard to the distribution of the three types of calls: sixteen T calls. 9 2 nineteen I calls . and twenty-three I-T calls). We will discuss each type of call respectively in the sequence of T calls, I calls, and l-T calls 4.1.1 Transactional Calls As defined previously. T calls, as a general cateuorv. refer to telephone calls made from participants' residence or place at work to businesses or institutions such as telephone services, department stores, universities, or dental clinics. Most of the calls in this CC group, in spite of the name transactional as defmed here, were made to obtain information, not to conduct actual transactions This reflects the fact that the use of telephone in China for business purposes is largely limited to dissemination and e.\change of information Its use for scheduling appointments, placing orders, or making reservations is not observed in the corpus: neither has it been experienced by my participants The discussions v\ill be presented in the following order: opening, statement of purpose, and closing A. Opening Three phases of opening are examined: greeting, identification, and phatic utterances, (a) Greeting For businesses, services, and institutions (universities and hospitals), there is a variety of forms for answers to summons of calls (or greetings) .Although there are only sixteen calls, six different answer forms are observed: (1) in UI How can I help you'' please speak (2) I't", ii'j Hello. How can I help you"* hello please speak 9 3 H) lif Good morning/afternoon vou well (4) llf iii'i Good morning Hello. vou well hello (5) 'r. (name of a store) lonu prosper (6) Hello. hello With the small number ot'each type of response due to the limited number of total calls, we can not generalize the pattern of each form Yet it is clear that those greetings provided by operators (of telephone services, universities, hospitals, and department stores) usually feature some polite greetings such as iniJI 'How can Ihelp you'^'or f/jv4j' "Good morning/arternoon/evening " Specifically, answers number one through number four listed above are produced by operators or receptionists whereas greetings by shop attendants or service people in stores are mostly limited to form number six - ll[,< "Hello" with one exception, and that is the only other greeting form number five evidenced in the corpus. This suggests that operators who communicate with and provide service for customers over the phone are trained or required to use more polite language in their service due to the nature of their jobs. For the shop assistants who work in stores, on the other hand, the way they answer phone calls is predominantly the same as the way they answer calls at residence - with Hello (to be discussed more in detail later). Actually, the form in iJ| (literally "please speak"), translated here as "How can 1 help you." is only used in telephone calls. The expressionf/jUj', on the other hand, is used in face-to-face encounters as well A note of explanation is necessary at this point regarding the gloss for the expression . In the corpus, it has been given two different glosses 9 4 due to the different functions and positions in which it occurs in different Chinese calls. Specifically, it is translated as "Good mominsvafternoon" in the context of business calls due to its fianction as initial greeting produced by recipients of calls. How ever, it is translated as "Hi" when it occurs in positions other than the answer-to-summons position in other calls. (b) Identification Identification (of both the caller and the party called) is an indispensable sequence in any calls immediately following the initial greeting, yet how both parties accomplish mutual identification (or even whether explicit verbal realization is needed) can vary depending on the type of calls, the social and cultural context, the relationship between the two parties, and the degree of familiarity As for identification of the recipients, only eight percent of the businesses or institutions self identified themselves at the beginning of the call in the summon/answer turn (see T.ABLE4 I at the end of this section) The only businesses that did identify themselves in their answer- to- summons turn are the railway station information service and a repair store, both of which are fairly new The railway station itself is not new. but the special line for intbrniation service over the phone is. For the repair service, the store itself is new . It was set up only after electric appliances such as refrigerators and washers began to appear in more households The fifth answer type (business self-identification) listed at the beginning of this section is the actual greeting from the repair shop. For those two businesses that demonstrate self-identification, only the names of the businesses are pronounced, but not the names of the individuals who actually answer the phone. 9 5 The fact that most of the businesses/institutions did not identify themselves at the beginning of the call results in the prevalent practice revealed in the data of callers checking the place they reached Of the total sixteen calls recorded, two clearly started with business self-identification, which naturally excludes the need for the callers to confirm the name of the place they reached There are a few calls with inaudible beginnings and therefore, the first few words are ditTicult to determine On the whole, out of the sixteen calls, eleven (69%) feature callers confirming the name of the place they ha\ e reached, suggesting that self-identification of the businesses/ser\ ice is not part of the typical response for Chinese businesses and institutions Callers usually did not identity- themselves either There are only two cases in which the callers identified themselves to some extent at the beginning, but the way they accomplished it is quite interesting: In one case (3#Q). the caller identified herself as the one 'who purchased the Little Smart Washer " The washer connection is in fact an excellent reminder of her prev ious phone talk w ith the same shop assistant. With this prompt, the shop assistant immediately responded. "Oh, you are the one who wanted to buy the water hose for the washer, right '' Since the caller did not give her name in the previous call, it would not be helpful even if she told the shop assistant her name this time. However, since she did ha\e a relatively lengthy phone talk (compared with other business calls) the previous day inquiring about the "Little Smart washer,' to mention the name of the washer and her association v\ith the washer would help remind the assistant who she was, and it turned out to be the case. 9 6 In the other case (CC 5^=6). hearing the .i'< "Chang Xing" self-identification of the business, the caller replied. "This is a customer ' She thus provided a generic identification (customer) instead of identification by name As for w hy the customer identified herself at all compared w ith the rare occurrence of such behavior among other callers, there might be two reasons The first one is that this is in reply to the self-identification of the recipient - The other possibility is connected, and built on the first speculation. Since the caller had been to the L'.S for about eight months, the fact that she had had some telephone experience in the U S might have made her aware of the need to identifV' oneself in telephone conversations It does not mean she will automatically do so in Chinese, but it is possible that, on hearing the self-identification of the answerer, she was reminded of such a practice. But still, she would not identic herself by name; rather, "a customer" is adequate. In fact, 1 w ould argue that to identity- oneself by category is more appropriate than by name in China, if self-identification is needed in transactional calls at all. If one were to identify oneself by name to a business or institution and the recipient is not an acquaintance, it might be interpreted that the caller considers him/herself a VTP of some kind, so he/she expects others to recognize him/her by name As an ordinary person, no one would want to create such an image for oneself by giving one"s name in business calls unless one is asked to do so A more appropriate way to identify oneself is to give the context (such as the "Little Smart Washer" example) and the connection between the caller and the intended recipient or the place one is calling (such as a "This is a customer"). In addition to the culturally alien notion of self-identification by name in T calls, there is another key factor which makes self-identification unnecessarv- in the Chinese context ') 7 Since almost all the calls are for general information request (rather than conducting transactions as mentioned at the beginning of this section), there is actually no need for customers to identity- themselves The only call in which the caller's identification is requested is a call to a pager service (1 #8) when the purpose is to leave a message for the intended person. Even for this call, the caller did not identity herself at the beginning. She was asked her name (and last name only) by the operator at the end of the call for the purpose of passing on the message (c) Phatic utterances There is no phatic talk evidenced prior to the statement of purpose, nor is there phatic interaction between interlocutors atter the main purpose is attended to in transactional calls. The sequence of opening in the sixteen Chinese T calls made in China is shown in Table 4.1 below, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. In all summary- tables. A refers to the .Answerer and C refers to the Caller in a conversation. 9 8 TABLE 4 I CC: Transactional N=16 Opening Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetiny 100 Greetinu bv A 92 Greetinu bv C 75 Acknowledument Identification 88 SelflDbv A 8 Aftlrniinu A's ID bv C 69 SelflDbv C Phatic utterances B. Statement of Purpose All the callers either stated their purposes for calling after they confirmed that they had reached the right place or presented the purposes in their first turn if the answerers self-identified themselves Most of the statements of purpose for transactional calls seem to be modified by some linguistic devices that hedge or soften the request in some way (see CC/T list of statements of purpose at the end of this section) For example, the word in "please' is used in a number of calls The expression f/j; "Thank you" is employed when one of the callers presented her purpose One caller even used the word Ui^'L "to ask for advice,' which is not only formal but usually used in cases wherein the addressee is of respected status. In addition, there are a number of softening attachments to the word fn] "ask" infn] literally "please ask," in ["J K literally "please ask once," literally "ask see,'and fill fiij literally "ask one ask " All these different forms render the request of asking less forcefial and more polite, thus hedging the request for information. Apart from the linguistic forms that soften the requests for information, there are other ways of presenting one's purposes in a polite manner from a discourse structure point of view. For example, the call 3^1 1 started with explanations about why the caller needed to call. (CC ? 1 1) 0P2 A: ll['i wei Hello C: 11'^ li.l ,1;. i'lf i!j-[ I'll] - |!.- ei tong zhi xie xie v\ en yi sheng hi comrade thank ask one sound Hi. excuse me, is this f'l: K JL iii- .vK m fl! ii'r ni zhe er shi bing xiang gui ma you here be refrigerator counter Q the refrigerator section'.' A: li:^. ae Yes I <1 0 -> SP C: -h fi-; f'.f Lt U ii!:. wo yin vvei zhu de bi jiao yuan I because live PT relative far As I live quite far. a .11 f"J |nl /I- WO xianu wen wen kan I think ask ask see I am calling to see iL n i/K Vn ii i'i ir ni zhe er hai ou bing \iang you mei you you here seagull refrigerator have not ha\e if you have Sea Gull refrigerators. A; {]• fi^J. you de hav e PT Yes. we do It seems that the caller was concerned whether the recipient would be willing to respond to her question over the phone and therefore, she first presented the reason - she lived quite a long way from the store - which implied that it would be difficult for her to pay a visit to the store to find out that information herself therefore justifying her calling for the information 1 I) I CC/T Statement of Purpose Transcript Translation ifttiStf'i:. iiVl"! K- ]ji IL'ifU'i'f W" Exciisc mc. could >ou icll mc if>oii have specialist fj fit (l 0 f J i i"W'' appointment for extracting teetli".' ilVl"l • K- 'ij''j(I'if/i Could>ou tell mcif the number 673056 has been .. •JJcftlii'/l"! • '|: l^lCould\ou tell me if Xinxing bookstore is open on 'i'.)9] k If- f-' 'P' weekends"' ii'fl"!- ll^S^dSS** Excuse mc. I was tn.ing to call 6X3088 .... K L'l^'r • 'i'"Ji!;22GVV'i|'l 'j. ,il !• i ju ^ 'i-\ I'l^. t- The model 22 one. what is its horsepower, one and a half.' f'f ili iltrt'j. J 1 ha%c a questoin. Sincc 1 li\e quite far and would like to flT IL l-'yi ("i i'i bu\ a Haixing refrigerator from > our. l "d like to know if >ou ha\e Haixing refrigerator. -Pii-M A/fi: ('fitI'll /1-iV'H lii ''L -Sincc 1 li\c quite far. 1 would like to know if\ou h3\c flfi fr' Seagull refrigerator' -n.f'l'Jl 'yiiiill')'' i!r it {• l- Vi 'Li 1 would like to ask. if\ou know, if\ou ha\c the phone (i fi fj ' number for Xinguang Store"' /i jjc 22G\V'.A. .'^2G\V v; iMj fIL 'C 1 would like to know the prices for 22GWA and 32GW air conditioner iic&U'"! fi'l'ii't'ii-il Jfl'Ml'j'i :Ti fll 1 would like to know if ue can rent our car based on a -fNfig {U, a;"' Hat rate for a whole da\. ^;&riJliil • h V K •'A-lt V. ^-H'j W -HF. '| • f 1 1 would like to know the am\al time for the train schcdlue from Beijing toda\. •-'< i'k. ii. t'Lfl'J *** I am the one who bought the Little Smart Washer. 1 (» 2 Notes: * The caller"s utterance was not completed when the operator asked for the number again. ** The caller's utterance was not completed as the operator asked her to hold on when she answered another call *** The caller did not say anything about the purpose as the party called was reminded of her purpose by her mentioning of the brand of the washer C. Closing For telephone conv ersation closings, we will examine four sequences: pre-closing, initiation of closing, phatic utterances, and leave-taking. (The definition as well as the scope of each of the four sequences have been provided in Chapter 3.) (a) Pre-closinu Pre-closing is defined as an\ unsuccessful attempts by one of the parties involved in the conversation to close the con\ ersation: the effort may not have been successful due to either the introduction of new topics or the continuation of previous subjects by the interlocutors There is no pre-closing observed in any of the calls for this group. As a matter of fact, most of the calls terminated in a relatively rapid and brief fashion, and some may be said to end abruptly (b) Initiation of closing All the closings for calls in this group were initiated by callers. In addition, the initiation all took various forms of "Thank you" such as "Thanks a lot." "Thank you very much," or Thank you." Therefore. Thank you in its different forms serves as the I 0 3 signature (ScheglofFand Sacks, 1973) for T calls. Typical initiation of closing is presented as follows: (I#7) C: llf kf o hao hao OK good good OK. all right --> ic m m f'h m xie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot However, it is worth noting that the initiation of closing (from the callers) for transactional calls is quite often the equivalent of the very last utterance, or the terminal utterance of the conversation The expression terminal utterance is coined here purposely for several reasons first, a terminal utterance indicates this is the very last utterance for the particular telephone con\ ersation under discussion Secondly, it is often not an exchange, but only an utterance from one party, thus utterance. Thirdly, this term is so selected to be differentiated from the term terminal exchange (Scheglotf & Sacks, 1973): while terminal exchange is the lexical equiv alent of uood-bve in English, such use creates serious problems for analysis of the Chinese data because in some of the Chinese T calls, as we shall see, the terminal sequence may not constitute "good-bye ' As a matter of fact, the initiation of closing 'Thank you' did not receive a reciprocal exchange in return in seven (44°o) calls Consequently, for these calls, the conversations merely ended with the initiation of closing from the callers, that is, with 'Thank you' in its 1 0 4 various forms without anv responses from the recipients: nor was there the leave-taking exchange "good-bye." This is a highly marked discourse phenomenon. In summar\ . for Chinese transactional calls, initiation of closing not only serves as the beginning of the closing section: in a number of calls, it even ser\ es as the last utterance of the conversation This may not be what was intended by the speaker, that is, the caller Yet the lack of response to Thank you' resulted in the dual fijnction of the single-turn "Thank you' which both initiated and terminated the closing. In some of the calls, however, initiation of closing did receive response from the recipients, and the leave-taking sequence therefore ensued (c) Phatic utterances No phatic utterance is observ ed in the corpus for this group of calls. (d) Leave-takinu In Chinese, the leave-taking expression is |l]" 'jiL. literally translated as "again see," or I'l-1? "again meet" (as spoken in the Shanghai dialect). It is used in both face-to-face communication and telephone conversations. There are eleven calls {b9°o) in which the lea\ e-taking sequence is absent. As to what caused the absence of the lea\ e-taking sequence, there might be two different explanations. One possibility is that the lea\ e-taking sequence j'J- !AL is optional rather than a requisite for transactional calls as a routine for closing, as suggested by Clark and French (1981) in their study of telephone calls to a university sw itchboard Clark & French found that the 1 0 5 use of a Good-bye exchange increased when the operators revealed more about themselves during the calls or when callers telt more appreciation for the information they received. There are three calls in the corpus which ended as follows: (5#9) c: m m W \ie .\ie a thank thank SFP Thank you very much. A: 1114. en Uh hum (3:?I4) C; m f'l: \ie \ie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot A: f bu yao jin not matter No problem Closings without the leave-taking sequence as such have been observed and may be perceived as supporting the proposal that "Good-bye" may not constitute a requisite for closings in transactional calls Howev er, there are only three calls out of the sixteen that exhibit such a pattern for closing. For the other eight calls without the leave-taking sequence, the presence or absence of the leave-taking sequence is more likely determined by the response of the recipient to the preceding utterance "Thank you" rather than by the three factors mentioned by Clark and French. For those eight calls, conversations are sealed with the single "Thank you' utterance from the callers. v\ith no reciprocal response 1 0 6 from the addressees In other words, when the recipients rendered no response to the "Thank you" produced by the callers, they had in etTect terminated the conversation and made the leave-taking sequence unnecessary as well as irrelevant since the addressees were not participating in the conversation any more There are five calls (3 l°o) in the corpus that exhibit the leave-taking sequence. Yet analysis of the interactional pattern for closing in these calls actually supports the same observation discussed above For those five calls that exhibit leave-taking, four feature reciprocal exchange for the preceding sequence "Thank you" (the fifth case will be discussed separately). Put another way, only when there is a reply from the recipient to the initiation of closing does the caller proceed with the leave-taking sequence. This is only logical, as the desire and need for any further communication takes as pre-condition (in normal circumstances) the willingness from both parties to conxerse and to respond to each other There is one case (2?? 13). lio\\.e\er, that shous a pattern in contrast with other calls, this call does not exemplity- the typical "Thank you" sequence as in all the other transactional calls, instead, the leave-taking sequence is in place. (2;^I3) OP A: ii'f ij\- qing jiang please speak Can I help you '' C: iW i5l| k -T' xie xie I da xue thank thank y universitv Excuse me. is this Shanghai University'^ I 0 7 ae \'es SP C: ill i,'i |nl • K. f'l^ fi J iJL JL wo \iang qinu wen yi xia ni men zhe er I think please ask once you PL here Could vou tell me if Xinxin" Bookstore Iff VC 15 Mi III !t)] m k if- 4^ n--' xin xing shu dian xin qi liu xin qi tian kai bu kai new prosper bookstore Saturday Sunday open not open is open on Saturday and Sunday'^ A jI ^ii jri zhe dao bu zhi dao this yet not know 1 don't know about that. C: a O Pardon'^ A. 4 ^ j.i I iii bu zhi dao not know I don't knov\ C: jN III iii llpif^ bu zhi dao de a not knov\ PT Q You don't know'^ —> A: ae yes No C: li|^. o OK -> LT |IJ- 1? I 0 H zai liLii again meet Good-bye As we can see. there is absence of "Thank you" in this call which designates it as a marked case from other transactional calls The reason might be that the caller did not feel the recipient deserved a "Thank you" as she apparently vvas not helpful. Simply saying "I don't know," the recipient did not provide any forms of help or offer any information for the caller, not even a phone number where the caller might seek for more assistance Since the only option other than "Thank you" for closing such a call is to say "Good-bye", that is what she did The sequence of closing in the sixteen Chinese T calls made in China is shown in Table 4.2 below, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. I () 9 TABLE 4 2 CC: Transactional N=I6 Closing Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closinu 0 Initiation of closinu 94 Initiation bv A 0 Initiation bv C 100 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances Leave-takinu Initiation bv A 20 Initiation bv C 80 Simultaneous initiation 0 On the whole, the lea\e-taking sequence in Chinese transactional calls presents a mixed picture Vlost closings do not evidence leave-taking, but approximately one-third of the calls do. Moreover, they are mostly initiated by callers, rarely by the recipients. It is also interesting to note that those calls w ith leave-taking sequence are calls answered by attendants working in shops, but none of them are answered by operators. It seems that shop assistants showed more individual response, more warmth and enthusiasm 1 1 0 than operators in their communication with customers. It is ironic that operators' answers to summons in their first turn contain more polite expressions and operators are supposedly better trained to ser\ e customers over the phone. Although a strong claim concerning the status of the leave-taking sequence in transactional calls cannot be made solely based on this corpus, analysis of closing exchanges with adjacency pair provides us with a clear picture of verbal interactional pattern that reflects the unequal distribution of turn exchanges between the caller and the party called, therefore revealing characteristics of the relationship between the two parties. Here is the summary of patterns for the last exchange(s) during closing: (I) c Thank you A: 8 calls (11) C Thank you. A: No problem C Good-bye A: 4 calls (III) C Thank you. A: No problem Good-bye C Good-bye. 1 call (IV) C Thank you. A: L'h hum 2 calls (V) C Thank you A No problem. 1 call Total; 15 calls 1 I I Of these tlve types of patterns, the first two groups (I & 11) do not meet the criteria of adjacency pair (Schegloff & Sacks, 1973); in those twelve calls, there is no exchange of leave-taking Rather, closing is accomplished in a single utterance. The proposed characteristics of adjacency pair includes (among others) two utterance length, adjacent positioning of component utterances, and different speakers producing each utterance (ScheglofT & Sacks. 1973) However, in type I and 11 of the above mentioned calls, there is only one utterance, thus no adjacent positioning of component utterances, and only one speaker speaking What we have observed shows that the second part of the adjacency pair is absent in the majority (7.>° o) of the last turn for closings in T calls. Moreover, the second part is only missing in slots which belong to the recipients Based on the data for interactional and Interactional-Transactional calL^. I believe that absence of the second part of the adjacency pair is marked rather than the norm for Chinese conversational interaction. First, it needs to be established that in Chinese, people do say I'f lAi"Good-bye" to each other when they close telephone conversations .-Vctually. ver\- often Chinese interactants say "Good-bye" more than once when they do leave-taking, as will be demonstrated later Secondly, not responding to one's conversation partner when one is being thanked or when one is performing leave-taking is uncommon and rude. My interpretation and argument for the absence of the second part of the adjacency pair in Chinese calls is that the non-reciprocal leave-taking reflects the unequal relationship between the customers and the sales or serv ice people. The absence of the second part of the adjacency pair, be it in the ca.se of "Thank you" or in the case of I'j- IaL "Good 1 1 2 bye\ is not incidental, nor is it due to personal preference of the recipients. It mirrors the social status of the participants vis-a-vis each other in the given context: the callers are the less povverfial party whereas the recipients are the ones with relative power. It is the callers who are making requests for information, and the recipients are the ones, as has been reflected by their language use, who have control over the response or help they provide for the callers. To explain this phenomenon, we need to examine the larger social context in which the interaction was embedded. In China, especially in the past several decades, the relationship between the customer and business/service people was the opposite of that in the U.S. or other western countries Until quite recently, with regard to the relation between the sales person and the customers, it vvas always the sales persons or service people who were more powerful This perceiv ed pow er derived from a combination of factors such as public ownership of the business/seiAice. the non-existence of competition among businesses and services, the limited supply of commodities, and the lack of incentive for sales persons to do more business. .Although the whole situation has changed quite significantly in the last two decades or so since the reform and changes in the economy, in the case of transactional telephone calls, it is still the sales persons who consider themselves more powerllil and appear to be so As has been illustrated repeatedly by research in anthropology and sociolinguistics, language use reflects the social status of the participants in interaction. The absence of the second part of the adjacenc\- pair in closing of the telephone conversations for transactional calls points to a sociolinguistic phenomenon in the Chinese society, namely, an unequal 1 I 3 relationship between the customers and the sales or service people "Linguistic routines of greeting and parting, far from being relatively meaningless and mechanical social behavior, can thus be understood as extremely important strategies for the negotiation and control of social identity and social relationship between participants in conversation" (Laver, 1981. p. 304). 4.1.2 Interactional Calls Interactional calls refer to telephone calls made to family, friends, or relatives for the sole purpose of getting in touch, show ing concern, or exchanging information about the well-being of each other The total number of interactional calls is nineteen, including calls to mothers, sisters or sister-in-laws, friends, and relatives. A. Opening Openings of interactional calls will be discussed in the same sequence as that of transactional calls: greeting, identification, and phatic utterances (a) Greeting Translated as "Hello." I'i" is the unified answer to summons for calls to residence. None of the calls received at residence exhibited a difterent form of answer in the first turn. However, it should be pointed out that Hi" is not used exactly the same way as "Hello" in English. Its difference from its English counterpart is exemplified in two aspects. First, whereas "Hello" is used in face-to-tace interaction as well as in telephone calls, this is not the case with ii[< If used in face-to-face encounters. Hi" is more like "Hey you\ similar to the Swedish "Hallo" (See Lindstrom, 1994). It is not a polite way of greeting or addressing 1 I 4 people except when one uses it to call an unacquainted person to attention or in telephone conversations Secondly, in telephone conversations in English, Hello' is mostly used as an answer to summons or. to a much lesser extent, used as a response to the recipient's answer to summons in intimate relations In Chinese, the use of is more complex. On the one hand, it is used for initial answers to summons by recipients; on the other hand, it can be used along with addressing, therefore functioning as both an attention-getter and as a special type of greeting as in the example 1??3 below But one important characteristic is that it is usuallv not to be used as a greeting after recognition is achieved, (1-3) A: lll'i wei Hello. C: 111'^. (i.r -fij. IW wei he yue a hello name SFP Hello Is that XX ' A: li'f ei Yes Greeting by the callers takes a number of forms The most common for this group is addressing the recipient (atfirming the recipient s identity) with no explicit expressions for greeting (52'''o) (Strictly speaking, this subcategory might belong to the discussion under Identification since there is no expression for greeting. Yet in order to provide an overall picture of the greeting patterns rather than to describe one pattern in one section, the overall picture of callers" greeting will be presented together in this section.) For example, we have the followinu: (2=2) OP A: "I'i wei Hello C; ll'id", ma ma Mom. A: \i'i. lifljil;.. ei wenjin yes name Yes. XX (name of caller). (b^2} OP A: ll['^ uei Hello C: yang min zhen SN first name XXX (name of recipient) The next type of caller's greeting in descending order of frequency count is greetin plus addressing (32°o). An example is given below: (3?8) 0P2A: lll'^ uei Hello C; 11^ i,-. ei xiao yun hi name Hi. Xiao Yun (name of reipient) Greeting only without addressing is the least common type of response from the callers, constituting l6°o For example. I I 6 OP A: wei Hello C; ll'i". ei Hi A; in fnj ]•}<; ifii? qing wen zhao shui please ask look for who Whom do you want to speak to please ' As the data suggests, greeting in I calls commonly consists of addressing alone or addressing along with the word n'i' or Hill; Between intimate relations such as spouses, a mere greeting of H'l" is acceptable As a general description, neither of these two words are equivalent of "Hello" or Hi in English regarding their meaning, function, and usage. We have discussed the word in previous paragraphs. The word 1'^", due to its different usage and meaning, is given two glosses in the transcripts When used as a reply to addressing or calling, it is glossed as "Yes " Used as greeting, it is glossed as 'Hi." Yet it needs to be noted that its use in the sense of "Hi" as a greeting all by itself is usually between intimate or verv close relations only, and betw een interlocutors of equal social status, not with parents, superiors, or senior relatives. It is worth noting that for the callers" first turn, callers almost always addressed their recipients except in calls with special conditions. That is. either there was a switch-board situation in which the first person answering the call was not the intended recipient and the caller was not acquainted with that person, or the caller considered it adequate to provide I 1 7 minimum response in the first turn such as due to the assumed ability of the recipient to recognize the caller's voice The greeting pattern obser\ ed in the data suggests that for I calls in Chinese, greeting by callers is realized typically through addressing the recipients or addressing accompanied by greeting. Addressing recipients, therefore, constitutes an essential component for openings in I calls; greeting in I calls is optional due to the constraints of the linguistic forms for greeting. This is in fact consistent vv ith greetings in face-to-face encounters in Chinese. For example, if a student happens to ualk facing a professor, the student will address the professor as Professor X" as a greeting rather than "Good morning'/" Hi" which is a generic expression. In such case, the use of either I'ji' or lI[iJ would be unthinkable, as explained above. (b) Identification Most of the interactional calls achieve identification of the caller through voice recognition and it is the preferred means tor identification There are two levels of analyses that indicate \oice recognition is preferred over self-identification: first, the majority of the calls achieve caller identification through voice recognition; only four callers self-identified themselves. Secondly, in six calls in which the recipients did not recognize the callers' voice after the callers" first turn, the callers tried to provide more voice sample instead of giving their names immediately, w hich suggests self-identification is not only dis-preferred, but only used as a last reson The examples below w ill demonstrate the avoidance of self- identification from the callers I 1 8 In the case 4^4. the caller addressed the recipient in her first turn, and then imitated the recipient's formal answer with her addition of f'jvtj' "Hi" in Turn 4 to provide more voice sample for the recipient It is actually perfectly appropriate in Turn 4 (caller's Turn 2) for her to identify herself if she chose to do so since she was not recognized yet. However, the caller preferred to let her interlocutor find out her identity rather than announcing it herself In Turn 5, as expected by the caller, the recipient easily recognized her. (4#4) TI A: llll^ \sei Hello T2 c .[i )1- li hui dan SN first name XX X (name of recipient ) T3 A: ii'i ij|\ ai qing jiang yes please speak Yes Good e\ ening T4-: C; i,', iir Hi qing jiang ni hao please speak \ ou good Good evening Hi T5 A: ir. i'r hi la xu xu chen ling SN SN first name X, XX X (name of caller) In the following call numbered 4#5. it is the same caller but to a different recipient. (4#5) A. Il[l wei Hello 1 I 9 C: nz iVP Ii'i^ ei yangjing zai ma hi SN first name at Q Hi, is XX there"' A: ji!; ai wo shi hi I be Yes, this is she Ji!; ni shi shui you be who Who is it calling ' —> C: I'j'p yang jing SN first name X X (name of recipient). A: IIT ei Yes --> C: li'i' ei Hi. A: HX ei Hi --> C: i'r Ik. xu chen ling SN first name XX X (name of the caller). As we can see. the caller did not recognize the recipient after the initial answer, and therefore, she asked 'Is XX there'' The answerer then replied, "This is she." She also 1 2 (I explicitly asked, 'Who is it calling''" What is interesting is that the caller did not directly answer the question. Instead, she addressed the recipient, providing more voice sample with the intention to let the recipient recognize her voice, a similar pattern with that in the call 4#4. Nevertheless, the recipient was still not able to recognize her voice In her third turn, the caller tried one more time, greeting the recipient, yet her voice sample still did not enable A to achieve caller identification It is at this point that the caller finally gave up and self-identified herself in her fourth turn The interaction pattern clearly demonstrates that the caller's delay in performing self-identification is a purposeful attempt. Although the caller did not answer the recipient's question about her identity directly, she was not neglecting the question. The caller was in fact providing clues for the recipient in the hope that more voice sample would enable the recipient to recognize her Such interaction was accepted and understood between the interlocutors. In the call (2^4) presented below , the caller greeted the recipient in her first turn. But it was a minimum voice sample, with a greeting that was generic. Therefore, the recipient was not able to identify the caller Politely. .A asked. Who do you want to speak to please*^' The caller did not ansvser the question directly, however Instead, she addressed the answerer, a similar response as the case in 4^5 discussed previously. (2^4) A: lll'i wei Hello -> C; HI ei Hi A: ii'j- fi'J 1 2 I qing wen zhao shui please ask look for who Whom do you want to speak to please"^ --> C: tS wei w ei name XX (name of recipient) A; lijlc o a yi Oh. aunt C: li'i. f/j: IliT- 4^' ;l', m- ei ni tinu bu chu a yes you hear not out SFP Yes. You couldn't recognize my \oice'' There are three calls, in fact, in w hich callers made positive comments about the recipients" ability to identity- the callers easily at the beginning of the call. In the case 2#4 above, the caller said to her niece. "\'ou couldn't recognize my voice'^' The fact that voice recognition is verbally commented upon indicates that it is a significant aspect of relation building as well as phatic talk To be able to recognize one's caller s voice seems to be appreciated and worth mentioning. In fact, in a phrase book (Tung. 1993), learners of Chinese are introduced to the phrase 'Guess who this is calling' in the section under Calling a Friend by Phone (p. 109) Out of the nineteen calls, only four calls (24''-o) feature caller self-identification. The percentage for caller self-identification here does not include the call of 4U5 discussed previously in which the caller was asked her name but kept delaying giving her name for three turns in the hope that her \ oice would be recognized This is not self-identification on her own accord, and therefore not taken into account for tabulation 1 2 2 For those four calls in which caller-identitlcation was oftered, each of the recipients had not had contact with the respective caller for a number of months. Specifically, one was a relative who lived in a ditYerent province, one was a teacher for the caller's daughter a year ago, one was a cousin of the caller (but they had not kept contact on a regular basis), and one was a colleague who took the same training session with the caller months ago (c) Phatic Utterances One of the characteristics of interactional calls is that there is phatic talk in almost all the calls (94° o) prior to the callers' moving onto the main purpose of calling (with the exception of one case. 1?.^) Moreover, phatic utterances took different forms. It was either an inquirv' or a statement, and addressed aspects related to the relation between the interlocutors or the state of the addressee. The phatic utterances for Chinese calls can be divided into the following categories: voice recognition, caller's intrusion, lack of contact, and the addressee's state (modification of Pavlidou. 1994) The first three categories generally concern the relational issue v\,hereas the last category expresses concern for the addressee. The category' addressee's state can be further divided into two sub-categories: general state and here-and-now questions (see list of Phatic Utterances for CC/1 at the end of this section) Comments on voice recognition are directly connected to the relation between the two parties involved. By commending the other party for her immediate recognition, the caller expresses her keen awareness of the recipient's familiarity with her voice as well as the caller's delight in being recognized, therefore building positive face of both parties. On the other hand, if the recipient has not been successful at recognition of the caller's voice. 1 2 3 comments about voice recognition will still be phatic in that such comments convey the idea that the caller wishes her \ oice were recognized, and particularly, recognized by the recipient. Consequently, in spite of the fact that acknowledgment or reference to the recipient's failure in recognizing the caller's voice may make the recipient lose face in a way, comments on voice recognition still can contribute to solidarity building and bonding between the two parties in its unique way, therefore constituting phatic talk Concerns for possible caller's intrusion is expressed by two callers in their phatic utterances (2rf8, 4#6). It needs to be made clear that the sense of intrusion is not carried explicitly through the wording itself; rather, it is through both the act of inquiry about whether the recipient was napping or sleeping and the caller's reaction (apology, for example) on hearing an artlrniati\ e reply In 4^0, the caller found out that the recipient was taking a nap when she called, and therefore she apologized several times during the call for disturbing the caller, even in closing. In 2#8. the caller apologized when she learned that the recipient was about to take a shower However, an inquiry about whether the addressee has eaten or not does not necessarily suggest the caller is concerned about the call constituting an intrusion, especially from a traditional Chinese perspective Rather. J "Have you eaten yet'shares some similarity with the 'howareyou" inquiry in English (this will be discussed in more detail in the next few paragraphs) It seems what constitutes intrusion may be culturally specific: for Chinese, disturbing one's nap may constitute disturbance, delaying other's shower may cause inconvenience, but calling during meal time may not be (for some Chinese) as imposing as it is in other cultures such as in the U S. I 2 4 Phatic talk concerning the lack of contact between the interlocutors is observed in three calls, kf 'K 'iiL j' "Long time no see' or j' "Long time no talking" were stated by either the caller or the recipient For callers, such an expression can serve both as phatic talk and the statement of purpose for interactional calls Recipients express their rapport with as well as their enthusiasm tor conversing with the callers through those expressions The last category concerns the addressee's state (general or here-and-now activity). The general state inquiries include(i "Ha\e you eaten yef^" ( "How are you'^' and f'j: A: f'Is it your day otTtoday•^' etc. "Have you eaten yet." which has been obser\ed by several scholars (e.g. Gunthner. 19Q3a), is a conversation opener for talks or even brief greetings around meal time for many Chinese. It has, however, caused serious misunderstanding for many nativ e speakers of English and other languages who are not familiar u ith the Chinese culture .Although the speaker is asking the addressee whether he or she has had meal yet. it usually implies no intention of inviting the addressee to a meal unless the inquir\ is made by the speaker in his or her own home. It is basically a phatic inquir\' sharing similarities with the English How are you. Nevertheless, whereas How are vou is almost an all-time-suitable inquiry, there is time constraint as well as register difference as to when ("Haxe you eaten yet' can be used. It is only around meal time that interlocutors exchange the inquiry. Moreover, it is not to be addressed in formal contexts I 2 5 In the call 4^3 cited below, on hearing that the addressee was having dinner in response to her question "Have you eaten yet," the caller did not ask if she needed to call back another time but kept conversing with the recipient. (CC4 ~ 3) 0P2 .A: ll['i wei Hello C ^ iji|j li lao shi SN teacher Ms. Li II ei Yes --> C: f/j; [71 HZ J' ll'V' ni fan chi le ma you meal eat .ASP Q Did you eat \ ef^ --> A: -flc il' (h "2 wo zheng zai chi 1 just DL'R eat 1 am eating -> C: li-i. n: i\'} I'l^J (J'j (l"j. ei wo shi zhen yun de ma ma hi I am name FT mom Hi, this is Yun Zhen's mom. Nevertheless, this is more of a traditional way of opening conversations. Furthermore, the disregard for whether the recipient was dining or not is also changing, especially among people who have more contact with Western culture. 1 2 r> A different inquiry- beionuing to the same addressee s state category is observed in the corpus which addresses the here-and-now activity the recipient is engaged in. Specifically, these include {\. I' f| {]'i li "What wereyou doing"^ WatchingTV"^' or(fI- -n 'iifJtl'P"!'' "Were you watching TV'"'' Such inquiries index the callers' familiarity or intimacy with the party called and the mentioning of the acti\ ities itself contributes to rapport building from a Chinese perspective. Furthermore, such inquires also show callers" interest in what the addressees are engaged in as well as their concern for the recipients Although there is one call in this categor\' that does not seem to contain phatic talk before the main purpose was presented, this call is actually a middle-ground type in- between interactional and Interactional-Transactional call The purpose of the call was to ask about the caller s niece's sickness, and therefore, it tits the interactional category. On the other hand, it did have a specific purpose of asking for some information, not merely a general "touch base" type of call This might help us better understand why this call was without phatic moves prior to the main topic. To summarize, there is phatic talk for interactional calls before interlocutors move on to the main topic of the conversation Phatic talk addresses voice recognition, caller's intrusion, lack of contact between them, or addressees' state. The sequence of openings in the nineteen Chinese interactional calls is shown in Table 4.3, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 1 2 7 TABLE 4 3 CC: Interactional N=19 Openina Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greeting 100 Greeting by A 100 Greeting by C 53 Acknowledgment 89 Identification 89 Self ID by A 0 Affirming As ID by C 79 Self ID by C 24 Phatic utterances 95 I 2 S CC/I Phatic rtterances Prior to Purpose Statement Transcript Translation I. Voice recognition: J' You recognized my voice immediately, wow! Oh. you're pretty good at voice recognition. immwMmi So you could recognize my voice. You couldn't recounize mv voice'' II. Caller's instrusion Were you taking a nap' in. Lack of contact Long time no talk J' Lonu time no see IV. Addressee's state 1. ueneral state: {{h^ymi'xi j'nT Have you eaten yef How are you' Is it vour dav otVtodav' 2. here-and-now acti\ ity What are \ou doing ' Watching T\"' (('jOfh/i'liMll-f' VK'ere you watching TV' Were you making calls just now. Mom'' B. Statement of Purpose Generally speaking, there are two ways participants present their purposes of calls: they either state their purposes (in the form of a question or a statement) or they are prompted or asked by the party called to which they respond. But the latter cases are in the mmoritv. I 2 9 Formulaic expressions that callers use in the corpus to make it clear that it is a pure interactional call include the tbilowinu: Haven't called you for a long time. J' Long time no see. How are you"' / How are you doing"^ How are you both today. Dad and Mom'' km, How are you recently'^ How is your health'^ Are vou busv"^ Vers busv'^ The question ('lUf ll'V' "How are you'^' may seem to be more like a general initial inquiry rather than a question stating the purpose of the call from the perspective of a native speaker of English. Nev ertheless, it is sometimes used as a genuine question to express one's concern for the addressee in Chinese conversation, and a number of calls feature such a way of presenting purpose of calls On the other hand, its non-inquiry form (with the question tag missing) is used in a substantially different way which will be discussed in the 1-T section Sometimes, before the callers had the chance to state their reasons for calling, recipients made inquiries as to the purpose of calls phrased in questions such as (f'jO'iLi ffKHiij) "What's up'^' Such inquiries were made either by seniors or interlocutors of close relationships such as good friends or close relatives. In response to recipients" inquiries about the purposes of calls, callers often stated their reasons for calling as follows. '{'Ai] (10. (iiit)!"! "Nothing special. Just to say Hi and see how you are doing." As the purpose of interactional calls is to ask how the addressees are doing, the phatic talk and the actual presentation of purpose are closely related and the boundary between I 3 0 phatic talk and main topic is ver\' often blurred Yet as can be seen in the transcripts, there are still differences given the context It is also interesting to note that it is not necessarily the case that the callers will be granted the right to initiate topics In three calls, it is the recipients who initiated inquiries before the callers had had the opportunity to state their purposes of calling. But clearly all the inquiries addressed the callers" state and all the three calls are between like-age friends or colleagues. From a Chinese perspective, such a move to initiate phatic inquiries by the recipients may be considered as an indication of rapport, concern, and enthusiasm, not as a signal of violation of speaker's turn and rights C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu The designation of pre-closing in the closing section requires two conditions: the linguistic form which e.xpresses the intention of the speaker to draw the conversation to a close on the one hand, and the continuation of discussion or the introduction of a new topic on the other There are fi\e calls (3 l°o) v\hich are coded as having pre-closings. all of which are produced by callers To group them into categories, we have the following: remarks oriented towards recipients or recipients" family, promise for fijture contact, comments such as "That's it," and sumniar> of the purpose of call Listed below are examples of the four different categories: ftU'i lL You take care of yourself. OK*^ Then we'll talk more when we have a chance to get together I 3 I "2.. ^]|J fl9 fi: f I I hen that "sit !|tt 4j' Nothing else. I just call to see how you are doing. The presence of pre-closinu in interactional calls suggests telephone conversation closings in calls with friends or relatives may not terminate in a linear fashion as they do in T calls. Especially tor calls between panies with less frequent contact, such add-on-new- subject interaction following one party's initial attempt at closing is more likely to occur than between interlocutors who keep frequent contact. (b) Initiation of closing There are a number of linguistic forms in the Chinese data for announcing the closing of the telephone conversation These forms include the tw o most common expressions (along with their respective derivations) for announcing closings: (1) liiJliAff- "So much for now," and (2) '/JiJ li'jfi "That's it." They belong to neither caller strategy nor called strategy defined by ScheglotTand Sacks (1^73); these forms are neutral because they make no reference to either party's interest in closing. In addition to the direct announcing of closing, there are other ways of initiating closing that are more polite and used particularly when the party called is a senior relative or respected by the caller These may consist of the following: i'\', |'| iJ. 'You take care of yourself'(for senior relatives) or "VVe/I will visit you next time' (to respected party) For interactional calls between female friends, participants often ask the other party to say "Hi" to her husband or parents, which is also a gesture of readiness to terminate the conversation I 3 2 Closings are initiated by callers in this group with the exception of two calls. For those two calls, one closing is initiated by the caller's mother and the other by the caller's aunt. It should be mentioned that telephone bills in China are based on both the number of calls and the total amount of time for calling That is what prompted the aunt to terminate the call when she said. "We've talked for quite long now So much for now " Therefore, her initiation of closing derives partly from her consideration tor the caller since the caller is the one who needs to pay the bill eventually (c) Phatic utterances As explained in the section on coding in Chapter 3. phatic utterances refer to comments pertaining to phatic themes but are not coded as Initiation of closing in the transcripts. For all the seventeen closings analyzed, twelve contain some phatic themes (71%). The most common theme in closing is future contact (59°o). Expression of gratitude, which occurs in 35°o of total closings, is the next most frequent theme. More specifically, it seems that in most cases, thanking is conveyed to friends or to relatives, but not expressed between intimate relations such as daughter-mother or sister-in-laws. In Chinese society, intimate relations exclude the use of Thank vou because verbal expression of gratitude is considered unnecessary-, superficial, or even awkward for such relations. It may in fact be considered iji "to be treated as outside relations ' The very phrase itself speaks well of the cultural perception that expression of gratitude is alien to "inside' relations The participants have expressed similar opinions regarding the expression of gratitude between intimate relations What is deemed more important than the verbal I 3 3 expression is similar deeds in return when such needs arise, and this is considered the best way to show appreciation tor others" help and favor. Another observation concerns the absence of phatic utterances for closing; it is only in the two calls between daughter-mother and one call betvseen a niece and her aunt that there is absence of phatic comments The absence of phatic comments in the daughter-mother calls is understandable First, as we know, the relation is intimate and steady Secondly, in fact, the daughter has been calling her parents every day and there is no need for elaborative closing. Therefore, phatic comments can be dispensed with, an example lending support to Wolfson's vie\\ on the bulge theor> (VVolfson. 19S9) In the case between the aunt and the teenage niece, status difference due to ages might have played a role in the absence of phatic closing (d) Leave-takinu Leave-taking is initiated b> both callers and recipients: fifty-three percent by callers, thirty-five percent by the recipients, and tweK e percent v\ith overlaps from both parties. Leave-taking for interactional calls presents a picture in sharp contrast with transactional calls in Chinese. V\ hereas leave-taking is absent in most of the transactional calls, it occurs in every interactional call, and more often than not, it takes more than two turns. Actually, sixty-t'i\ e percent, or a near two-thirds, of the calls feature leave-taking with more than two turns Here, a clo.ser look at some examples will show us the patterns: (2«) C: 11^- /// ki. ^JiJ ri9 fJc //ft- ^ o o o hao bie de mei shen me OK OK OK all riuht other PT not what 1 3 4 Ok. all right That's about it. A: mki n'j :!k\. hao de hao good PT good All right. Ok --> LT tl^ 1:: liilc::: zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-bye --> C: lif zai hui again meet Bye A: |i]: 1:. zai hui again meet Bye --> C: iij: 1:. zai hui again meet Bye In this call, there are four turns for leave-taking, starting with A"s I'j" which is similar to "Bye-bye .' in English, with the stretched sound of the second "Bye" and a rising tone. In response. C returned the leave-taking but it was followed by A"s "Bye' again Finally, it was after C"s second "Bye" that the e.xchange came to its end. Both parties did leave-taking two times, it seems In another call, we have the following exchanges. om A: =m iw m \ie xie o thankthank SFP Thanks a lot. I 3 5 c: m iw m i'b o xie \ie ni o OKthankthank you SFP OK. thanks a lot -> LT A: =|l]: 1- |i^ i:: zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye C; lift. I'l^ o zai hui OK again meet OK. bve A: |ii] f/j: g g llf wen ni ba ba hao ask you father good Sav Hi to vour dad. c: 141: ki nr [iqiidi m. o hao de xie xie xie xie OK good PT thankthank thank thank OK. all right Thanks very much A: [!l^ |i)- I: zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bve-bve C: |li 11^1 zai hui a again meet SFP Bye-bye Here, we have six turns for leave-taking. .Again, each party repeats "Bye' twice. Moreover, after the first leave-taking is conducted, the recipient adds her regards to the caller's father following the caller's leave-taking Since there is still one more leave-taking 1 3 6 exchange after this added regards, what finally seals the conversation is still the leave- taking sequence We will look at one more leave-taking exchange here ~>ic c: )Ji; 1 ,ii; rf; na me jiu zhe yang then just this way Then so much for now A: o OK c: m o OK. A: i!)| /' lip^ xie xie ni a thankthank you SFP Thanks a lot -> LT C: // lli zai hui again meet Bye idl iW r- 1',^?= xie xie wo gan slia thank thank I do what What do you thank me for"' A: =llii[ lliif lliif(';c-) he he he (laughter) --> C; lij. zai hui a again meet SFP Bve-bve : I 3 7 A: kf ky kf hao hao hao good good good OK OK -> C; |l[ |ll- zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye H f'j; fi'J III -k iif wen ni men tian yong lin hao ask you PL SN name good Sav Hi to XXX (husband of A) A; kf liao OK 1 will -> C: t'f 1- I'l- zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bve-bve —> A: |ii zai hui again meet Bye. This seems to be one of the most interesting leave-taking sequences in the corpus for three reasons: its length, its interaction pattern for leave-taking, and the interaction pattern for thanking First, it has eight turns for leave-taking alone (beginning with the first "Good-bye') Secondly, the caller repeats I'j "Bye" four times whereas the recipient only says "Bye" once Whereas the first slot for A's return of good-bye happens to be filled by A"s chuckling over C"s comments "What do you thank me for," A replies with "OK" in I 3 8 the second slot for C's second Bye ' The third slot is used by the recipient to reply to C's regards to A"s husband Yet what is interesting is that until A has finally verbalized her "Good-bye' in the fourth slot, the caller just keeps on saying 'Good-bye.' It is possible that a single acknowledgment from the recipient such as 'OK' does not carry the effect of the terminal exchange for the caller She is probably anticipating a more definitive and forcefijl leave-taking of "Good-bye" to seal off the interaction. It is indeed after A's "Bye' that the conversation is finally brought to a complete close. Thirdly, the caller's "What do you thank me for' further substantiates and supports my earlier observations of thanking Here. A's thanking C is intended for the call (it is the norm in Chinese to express thanking without being explicit). As for the caller's reply, it is not a real question for an answ er The caller actually knew the recipient was expressing gratitude for her call. But her answer is just another w ay to conv ey the idea that it is unnecessary'. This interpretation has been confirmed by my participants in the U.S. Leave-takings in Chinese interactional telephone conversations have projected some salient patterns: first, leave-taking does not always invoKe a single exchange of good-byes in Chinese conversation; rather, it often takes more than two turns. Secondly, repetition of such leave-taking is not meaningless Repetition tends to reinforce the message, and accentuates the phatic connection between the interlocutors. Moreover, its presence is related to conversational styles of both participants and their relation. Therefore, w e can not infer that the absence of repetition necessarily indicates lack of sincerity. Thirdly, related to the first point discussed, the initial leave-taking may not be followed by leave- taking only In other words, the boundary between the initiation of closing and leave-taking ! 3 9 may not be as clear-cut as it is in English Sometimes, interlocutors continue to do phatic talk while doing leave-taking (this will be discussed more in detail in the I-T section). In addition to the multi-turns for leave-taking, it is also a salient feature in the Chinese data that i']' 'aL "Good-bye" or "Bye" is repeated sometimes in the same turn by one speaker In fact, in Chinese, there are a fairly large number of words that are repeated in the form of AB AB. ABC ABC. or even AAAA to reinforce their meaning. Of special relevance here are the formulaic expressions that are used for social interactions such as greeting, leave-taking, thanking, congratulating, or meeting people. For example: How do you do./Hi Please sit down. Please sit down. Walk slowly Walk slowly Thank yoir Thank you. No problem. No problem Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. Very good. Very good Conuratulations. C onuratulations. What these expressions ha\e in common is that individually, each expression (which consists of most often tw o characters such as in "Please sit down" ) is and can be used as an entity on its own But in interaction, the repetition of each expression occurs often, lending more force or insistence on the part of the speaker compared with the single utterance Moreover, if the\ are repeated, the delivery of the utterance tends to be shorter but faster in pace That adds to the forcefulness of the expression This AB AB or ABC ABC formation of words explains the repeated ['j' I'l' l/iL in the conversations discussed here. The sequence of closing in the nineteen Chinese interactional calls is shown in Table I 4 0 4.4, along with the percentage of calls w hich includes each element. T.4BLE 4 4 CC: Interactional N=1Q Closing Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing Initiation of closing 100 Initiation by .A Initiation by C 88 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 71 Leave-taking 100 Initiation by A Initiation by C Simultaneous initiation 4.1.3 Internctional-Transactional Calls Telephone calls made to families, friends, relatives, or acquaintances for specific purposes amount to twenty-three Recipients include mother and mother-in-law, sister and sister-in-law, aunt, cousin, friends, colleagues, and former student, all of whom the callers I 4 1 are acquainted with, with the exception of one call in which case the intended person for the call is not home and the caller conv erses with the daughter of the intended recipient instead. A. Opening (a) Greetinu For recipients' answer to calls, a similar pattern is observed from this group of data: all but one of the calls receiv ed at residence feature !•[" Hello" as the standard answer to summons. Instead of answering the phone with simply I'l< "Hello." the recipient greets with I'll};, {''fJli "Hello. Good evening " It sounds formal and business like, and is extremely rare for answers to phone calls at residence. This perception has been confirmed by my participants. .As in most calls in my study, the recipient is not one of the participants. She is a young graduate out of college, and she is from the north of China. There are three other calls that feature initial greetings different from I't" "Hello " However, these are all calls made to recipients at work, who are telephone operators. (The caller herself is an operator ) That is why instead of !•[". the answer is either "Good morning' or ii'j ij| "How can 1 help you," which are typical openings for operators answering the phone as we have discussed in relation to the T calls. 1 4 2 (b) Identification Similar to the patterns observ ed in the I calls, voice recognition of caller identity is preferred. In addition, we ha\e two examples here that further substantiate the significance of voice recounition for Chinese interlocutors (2ffl 1) OP2A ll'H wei Hello C "11 'h it \s ei xiao shen hello little FN Hello. .\X A: Ii'|- ei Yes. C Ji'f n Ml R tlii cai de chu wo shi shui ma guess out 1 be who Q Guess who this is In this case, the caller wanted the addressee to guess who she was. In another call made by the same caller, she asked the recipient if she knew who was calling. These called-for guesses of caller identity suggest that the caller was interested in finding out if the recipient was able to recognize her \oice. On the other hand, the caller also anticipated that it might be difficult for the recipient to find out who was calling due to their not-so- often contact (and the caller expressed that anticipation in her request) But the playful request itself lent some phatic components to the conversation at the beginning. I 4 3 In the telephone openings observed, in addition to voice recognition or self- identification. there are also phone calls in which the caller's identity is not announced by the caller, nor asked or identified by the party called. In fact, the sequence for caller- identification is seemingly absent There are about five of those calls: one is between sisters but the others are all between colleagues and friends. For example, 3#2 is a call between sisters. On hearing and recognizing her sister"s voice, the recipient immediately asked the caller if she went back home to have lunch or not without responding to her sister's addressing nor greeting her (3^2) OP A wei Hello. C: iiii, ffi: ei \u ling zhi hi SN name Hi, XXX (name of recipient). A: f'j; i'i |||| i; ilZ iJi ni mei hui qu chi fan a you not back go eat meal Q Vou didn't go back home for lunch"!' The following is a call between friends who have not talked for a while. It further exemplifies the absence of verbal acknowledgment of caller identity {b^2) OP A: wei Hello C yang min zhen SN name XXX (name of recipient). 1 4 4 A: li'l" ei Yes C: k\ 'K A- 'AL J' ^2,. hao jiu bu jian ie me quite long no see ASP SFP Long time no see A: a VVhaf^ C k\ 'K iJiL J'- hao jiu bujian le quite long no see ASP Long time no see A: Il:i2. ae Yes. C: f'j; kf ni hao ma you good Q How are you doing!' As is illustrated in the example, there is no self-identitlcation by the caller, nor any comments from the called party to address or to acknow ledge the identity of the caller. It seems that the caller took it for granted that her voice would be recognized, or it was deemed unnecessary to make her identity explicit verbally There is another case in which the caller was asked her name but did not directly answer that question. (3#13) OP A: liri wei Hello 1 4 5 c: 11'^. /If i m fi-; ei tang wen lin zai ma hi SN name at Q Hi, is X X X there' A: )lf X ,T, i;- J' tang wen lin chu qu le SN name out go .A.SP XXX is not in C. ;ll i; J' chu qu le a out go ASP 0 Oh, she is out'^ A: i([: ni shi shui a you are v\ ho Q Who is this ' -> C: Ji-- ii& fj: JL ii'i-' ni shi ta nu er ma \ ou are her daughter Q \'ou are her daughter, right"' A: 1^5. ae N'es C: li::!" a Whaf^ A: llx^. ae Yes C: -fl< llp'j. ^11 f^j: i|! H fl'J. wo a wo dao ni jia li lai guo de I SFP I to you home come ASP PT Me"^ I've been to your house, you know. 1 4 6 f''jc 4^' ik iil J' m'' ni bu ren shi le a you not recognize ASP Q You can't recognize my voice"^ When asked who she was. the caller did not answer Instead, she asked if the recipient was the daughter of her friend After know ing for sure that this was the daughter of the intended recipient, the caller reminded the daughter that she had been to their house, and had met the daughter Still, she did not identif\' herself by name The caller's response is actually quite common The reason that she did not identify herself by name is based on the assumption that even if she mentioned her name, it would not help the recipient to know who she was However, to mention that she had been to their house would at least inform the daughter that this was a close friend of her mother All these examples suggest that in Chinese telephone conversations, voice recognition between acquaintances is the preferred means for identification of callers. Self- identification takes place sometimes, but it is less common. For calls between friends or sisters, some participants e\en start the conversation without identifying themselves; neither is there explicit acknouledgnient from the recipients regarding the callers" identity There is another interesting feature regarding the way self-identification is accomplished in Chinese That is, sometimes some people simply leave out the subject and verbs in their self-identification, and the result is that, once out of context, it is not clear what is addressing and uhat is self-identification. For e.vample. (5^5) OP A: K'l wei Hello 1 4 7 C; mwt xu yi qing SN name X X X. (name of recipient) A: li'i; ei Yes —> C: i"V yang yin SN name XX (name of caller). In this case, what is omitted is the word -flc "I" in caller's self-identification. Consequently, it may be confusing (in the transcripts) to the readers as to what the name stands for But usually self-identification is presented in the form of -ficXX "This is XX" in Chinese The expression"you well' is a way to greet people, but its usage seems to vary among the Chinese people As ue ha\e seen from our previous discussions, it is often the first answer to summons for calls to businesses or institutions answered by operators. Used in those situations, it is translated as "Good morning' or "Good afternoon.' When used in calls between acquaintances, houever. it is used as a greeting such as 'Hi." For example, (5??l) OP A. v\ei Hello C: ^11,4^: li jian hui SN name X X X. (name of recipient) ~> A: W'L f.'i: hf 1 4 H ei ni hao yes you well Yes. hi C; w o yang \ in I name This is XX --> A. li'i;. kf ei ni hao ves you u ell Oh. hi -> C: f^i; ki ni hao you well Hi In many textbooks for Chinese. is translated as "How are you" or "How do you do' in face-to-face encounters In telephone conversations, however, such translation seems inadequate and inaccurate When used as a greeting in positions other than the initial answer to summons, it functions as "Hi" and is therefore glossed as "Hi" in this analysis. There are at least two characteristics that define the context in which this expression is used. First of all. it seems that is used more often by those working in offices and by the younger generation. Those of my participants who tend to use it more as evidenced in the corpus are those working in offices or people doing administrative work generally speaking Secondly, such greeting seems to be appropriate only for certain relations such as acquaintances, colleagues, or friends. It is rarely used with relatives; neither is it used between intimate relations such as mother-daughter or sister-sister. In interviews, most of the participants considered it to be a greeting of the courteous or formal type, and could 1 4 9 not imagine its occurrence in conversations with relatives or family This is consistent with the findings observed in the I calls discussed in the last section: f'j^/ipHi" as a greeting is not observed in anv of the I calls between family members, good friends, or relatives. The rules of operation seem to suggest that there is distinction in Chinese between greeting formulae used for intimate relations and acquaintances But it is also important to note that the greeting is a modern expression, the use of which is growing among the young generation in a society that is open to the world. Further examination of the use of the greeting shows that its occurrence is mostly preceded by self-identitlcation in telephone conversations for this 1-T group of calls As voice recognition is a preferred means over self-identification, participants only self- identity- when necessar>- Therefore, the fact that f'jUj' is often associated with self- identification indexes the relationship between the participants as minus-intimate or more job-related (c) Phatic utterances Thirteen out of t\vent\-three of the calls (57°o) in the I-T group cover small talk or phatic talk prior to the discussion of the main topic. The categories of phatic moves are similar to what has been observed for interactional calls These include voice recognition, disturbance related inquiry, and inquiries of both general state or specific here-and-now activities of the addressee Phatic talk about lack of contact, however, is not found in I-T calls prior to purpose statement This observed difference from pure interactional calls seems logical. As is mentioned earlier, such a comment (e.g. W, f'Long time no I 5 <» talk') might give the impression that the purpose of the call is to touch base", which is not the case for I-T calls In addition, there is one more category of phatic talk that has been observed in this group of I-T calls 1 w ill name it Compliments In the call 6#8. the first recipient is the daughter of the intended recipient When the intended recipient got to answer the phone after her daughter, the caller commented that the recipient's daughter's voice bore much resemblance to that of her mother Naturally, such a remark addressing the bond between the mother and the daughter w ill please the mother In another call made by a caller who is an operator herself after addressing the recipient, she started her talk with the joking comment "N'ou are very triendly today" to her friend, who also works as an operator This can also be classified as a compliment (although it could be argued that the implied meaning may be read both ways if the emphasis is on today) In fact, the purpose of the call is to show concern for the recipient who has had some trouble with her job before and the comment on her manner is indeed a compliment. For the ten calls that do not show small talk prior to the purpose statement, seven contain some phatic talk after the main topic has been discussed. Topics for those after- purpose-phatic talk include general state inquiry, inquiries of caller's child, compliments on caller's personality, and good wishes There are three calls that contain no phatic talk at all: one is between sisters, one is between colleagues, and one is between friends. All of them are relatively brief, and all the interlocutors have had frequent or recent contact prior to the call The first is a call to a colleague early in the morning The caller explained to the recipient that she could not go to 1 5 1 work that day as the telephone company called them late the night before informing them that someone had to stav home that morning as the phone line had to be replaced. Therefore, the caller asked the recipient to inform her boss that she would not be at work in the morning. The second call is betv\een friends who were discussing arrangements to meet the next day or so The third call is between sisters The purpose is for the caller, the elder sister, to share some information with iier sister who has requested it earlier. While ninety-fi\ e percent of all Chinese interactional calls features phatic talk prior to purpose statement, this is not the case \s ith I-T calls. Less than half (43° o) of the I-T calls do not exhibit pre-purpose phatic talk, but there is often phatic talk following the discussion of the main purpose It seems that phatic sequences do not constitute an indispensable part prior to the discussion of the main purposes tor calls with specific agenda. While some callers preter pre-purpose phatic talk, some feel comfortable moving right onto the purpose directly The nature of call may also correlate with the presentation of purpose. Howe\ er. as there are not many calls making requests or asking for favors to provide evidence, such only remains speculation. What is significant of the findings here is that the natural con\ ersation data for this study has presented some evidence that the prevalent portrait of Chinese as always being "indirect' in their discourse is inaccurate. In telephone conversations, at least, phatic talk does not always precede the discussion of the main topic, as the data inform us This finding challenges the present stereotype of Chinese discourse being "indirect" for across- the-board application I 5 2 The sequence of openings in the twenty-three I-T calls is shown in Table 4.5 below, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element, TABLE 4 5 CC Interactional-Transactional N=23 Openinu Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greeting 100 Greeting bv A 100 Greetinu bv C Acknowledument 78 Identification 83 Self ID bv A 0 Affirminu A's ID b\ C 83 SelflDbvC Phatic utterances 57 B. Statement of Purpose There are sev eral features of statement of purpose including discourse markers, direct inquiries, and topic presentation First, in a number of calls, there are clear discourse markers indicating that the caller has specific matters to discuss or information to share The most common expression for such navigation is the expression f'j. ij| "''I' "You know what" In six calls, this expression is used to introduce the purpose. Similar discourse markers include f'hi'fr I'if 'You know what." f'l fuj . "I have made inquiries about... and this is what I have found out." or -JlJIiijrtij {} "I wanted to ask you." On the whole, almost forty percent of the I-T calls ha\ e clear discourse markers to indicate the main purpose of calling. The second feature invok es the use of questions. For example, in a number of calls, the callers use questions to present their purposes of calling. It should be pointed out that direct inquiries are used mosiK for calls that involve no impositions In fact, with the exception of one call, all the calls with direct inquiries at the beginning are calls made to help the recipients in some wa\ . either to share some information or to fmd out if the recipients needed further help from the callers, therefore involving no imposition. The one call that is of a different nature among the remaining inquiry-beginning calls is a call to a colleague at work of subordinate status when the call is to inquire about work progress Gi\ en the topic and relative status, the direct inquiry seems reasonable. Still, there is a sotiening prefix f/j: /]• T wanted to know ." The third feature concerns the presentation of topics or events which are related to the purpose of calling For example, in one call, the caller told the recipient that their boss 1 5 4 called her in the morninu and asked her to uo to work on the weekend. That started their discussion of work-related issues and lite in general. Clearly, expressions such as in "please" or "ask for advice" which have occurred in T calls frequentK are not used in conversations between friends, relatives, or acquaintances Granted, since most calls in this 1-T group happen not to involve requests, it could be argued that the nature of calls in this group difters from the transactional group Nevertheless. e\ en if requests are invoK ed, these expressions will not be used, as explained by my participants. Choice of expressions such as in "please" or "ask for advice' are formal and indicates social distance C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu Pre-closing shows a drastic drop compared with I calls There is only one call with pre-closing of the total), whereas thirty-five percent of the interactional calls feature pre-closings. The ditVerence between the two groups seems to suggest that closing tends to be brief for l-T calls In other uords. all but one call in this group terminate the conversation w ithout introduction of new subjects once closing is initiated. (b) Initiation of closinu Closing for most of the calls are initiated by callers, as has been observed in other groups of the Chinese data For recipient-initiated calls, most seem to have marked reasons or are between intimate relations Two calls initiated by recipients are due to circumstantial factors: in one case, the recipient had to msh to a meeting, and in the other case, the 1 5 5 recipient heard another phone ring and probably wanted to terminate this call in order to attend to the other call For another two calls with recipient-initiated closings, both recipients were former colleagues of the caller but had retired recently Both calls were made in the interests of the recipients (the caller helped them to run some errands at the work place). Therefore, they appreciated the caller's favor for them and they did not want to take up too much time of the caller on her day off. That was why they initiated the closing, as they indicated (c) Phatic utterances There are phatic utterances in almost two-thirds (64° o) of the closings for this group of calls. Since many of the calls are made to otfer some favor to the recipients, it is natural to expect more occurrence of gratitude expression at the end of the conversations. On the other hand, comments on future contact may not be the most frequently addressed theme for closing, compared with pure interactional calls. This is indeed what has been observed. For closing, the occurrence of thanking is slightly more than comments on fijture contact. But on the whole, compared with 1 calls, the occurrence of phatic content for closing (64%) is slightly lower than that of interactional calls (7 To). There are five calls that display no phatic aspects for closing, among w hich two are between sisters, one is to a former student, one is to a subordinate colleague at work, and one is between friends It seems that the absence of phatic talk for closing in this group bears some similarity with the findings in the I calls in that sometimes intimate relations can dispense with it 1 5 6 The pattern of thanking, in addition, is found to be consistent with our findings earlier for the I group That is. overt expression of gratitude is not typical for close relations, and it certainly does not occur in intimate relations. In the I-T group of calls, expression of gratitude is mostly between colleagues (d) Leave-takinu A similar pattern has been obser\ ed in this I-T group regarding leave-taking. Generally speaking, two-turn leave-taking is in the minority (27° o). The majority (73° b) of calls end with three or more turns for lea\ e-taking. There are at least four possible reasons that contribute to the multi-turn iea\ e-taking in Chinese telephone closings. First, a number of calls re\ eal a pattern of tripartite sequence instead of an adjacency pair. For example, \\e have se\cral calls in which leave-taking proceeds in a manner similar to the following: (5.-3) -> LT C (if. ijtL IW zai jian a again see SFP Bye-bye A: |li 'I. zai jian again see Bye ~> C: Itl". \l. ei zai jian yes again see Bye I 5 7 In order to understand why there are three turns tor leave-taking, we need to look at the linguistic forms first Here, the first leave-taking initiated by the caller is in a special form and has a special fiinction The addition of the word Hi], which is a Sentence Final Particle (SFP), makes the Good-bye" more tentative and calls for consent Instead of a plain and an asserti\ e leave-taking, the SFP softens the declarative force of the utterance by attaching an implied request tor agreement from the addressee, making the termination more of a mutual collaboration In other words, v\e might interpret the utterance as "Bye- bye, OK''" Therefore, the lea\ e-taking becomes only summons, not a decision, and awaits approval. On hearing the "Good-bye" from the recipient, the caller proceeded with her second leave-taking to terminate the conversation. It needs to be noted that such use of the SFP is probably used mostly b\ women Secondly, although there is tripanite leave-taking, it is not the only pattern for termination of conversations .-\s a matter of fact, there are some calls with four or even four-plus turns for leave-taking One of the reasons for the high number of turns might be the frequent overlaps and simultaneous talk for the closing sections for some Chinese Interactional-Transactional calls For e.xample. if w hat A has said happens to overlap w ith the utterance of B, A might feel it is necessary to repeat her utterance in case B has not heard what she said The high frequency of overlaps and simultaneous talk might have therefore increased the length of leave-taking to a certain extent One example of such overlap and simultaneous talk is presented below: (4f?2) IC c ki n^j K i.'/: ni- ni i}\-= hao de xia ci zai PP ni jiang good next time again to you speak 1 5 8 OK. ril talk to you next time A: ii]. 1: iqt o zai hui o OK again meet SFP OK, bye-bye C |l]"- 1; J" o zai hui o xiao ding OK again meet OK little SN OK, bye-bye. X X A; [|ij: <• iif Ic zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye c ;/ dang xin xie o careful some OK Take care A. ' • lift I If o zai hui OK again meet OK. bye //' C) C://' |li 1: zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye Thirdly, in spite of the fact that leave-taking is assumed to occur last in the conversation, in some of the Chinese telephone conversations, it does not necessarily only take place as the last exchange in closing In many cases, there is initial leave-taking in addition to terminal leave-taking That is, it is produced more than once by one party. Furthermore, leave-taking functions as the brackets (Goffman, 1974) of the closing 1 5 ') section, both marking off the beginning and sealing the closing, with other phatic utterances enclosed in such as thanking, regards to families, and good wishes. One such example is presented in the preceding paragraph (4#2). in which the caller told the recipient to take care after three turns of Good-byes ha\ e been produced Here we will present one more example of such an instance (1??1) LT C I If zai hui again meet Bye iW id! !i|-i xie xie ni a thank thank you SKP Thanks a lot A: |lj: zai hui bu >aojin bu yao yin again meet not matter not matter Bye. No problem. c |1J- o zai hui OK again meet OK. bye What we have seen from the examples provided is that phatic expressions sometimes follow the initial lea\ e-taking and then they are in turn followed by repetitions of leave- taking. This is not only observ ed in this I-T group of calls. In fact, two more examples can be found in the section on leave-taking for the I calls, namely examples 3#8 and 6#2. The last possible reason tor the multi-turn leave-taking in Chinese telephone closings derives from the fact that to repeat an utterance is usually to reinforce it, as the previous 1 6 0 discussion on ABAB formulae has demonstrated. For the same reason, to repeat |i]- IaL or f'J-1? 'Good-bye" tv\,ice (or more) usually makes it stronger than saying it once (although it does not mean that interlocutors will do so in an unlimited fashion) jij- literally means "again see" and. theret"ore. to repeat it migiit suggest the intensity and sincerity of such a wish, which is itself a phatic component The sequence of closings in the twentv-three Chinese I-T calls is shown in Table 4 6 below, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element 1 6 1 TABLE 46 CC: Interactional-Transactional N=23 Closing Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closinu Initiation of closinu 100 Initiation bv A 27 Initiation bv C 68 Simultaneous initiation Phatic utterances 64 Leave-takinu 100 Initiation bv A Initiation bv C 45 Simultaneous initiation 4.2 Telephone Conversations by Native Speakers of American English There are one hundred and nine calls all together made by native speakers of American English in the corpus, the largest set of data compared with other groups. The discussion in this section will follow the same sequence as that in the previous section: i.e., I will 1 6 2 examine T calls. 1 calls, and I-T calls in turn, each of which will again break into respective parts of opening, statement of purpose and closing. 4. 2. 1 Transactional Calls There are fiftv-two calls v\ithin this group As twenty-one (40°o) of the calls are made to various campus departments and otTices, a further breakdown within the T group is conducted to investigate possible variation between calls to businesses and calls to university offices A. Opening (a) Greeting The initial greeting by the recipients, or the answer to summons, is realized in the form of self-identification of the businesses, serv ices, or institutions reached with or without explicit greeting Identification will be discussed more in detail in part (b) of this section There are five types of answers to summons that have been identified based on the corpus of llfty-tuo calls (1) Greeting - self-identification (in one utterance) such as "Thank you for calling Star Copier." (2) Greeting + self-identification For example, "Good morning. Small animal hospital." "Good morning CTS" or "Hello KTAB This is Judy." (3) Self-identification - Greetings The following are examples: "Materials and Mechanics. Can I help you '" "Cable and Communication Kathy speaking How may I help you"^" I 6 3 (4) Self-identification such as "Early Education" or "West City Water This is Brittany"" (5) More than one openinu sequences sequence I - recorded message, sequence 2 - operator, and sequence 3 - ser\ ice attendant in the specific department. It is the fifth tvpe of answer, i e . the multi-sequence opening, that needs some detailed description here First, the caller hears a recorded message on getting through, which constitutes the first opening sequence (coded as OP I in the transcript). Next, the caller will proceed by pressing a selected number on her phone to speak with an operator (OP2 in the transcript). Finally the caller reaches the service attendant in the specific department requested - the third sequence (or second in some cases). For example. (5-3) ->OP 1 A: (Recorded message) Thank you for choosing Otfice Store... ->OP2 A Good morning Thank \ou for calling OtVice Store This is lirittany. How may 1 assist you'' SP C L'm I was wondering if you sell tape recorders with really good microphone'^ A L'h if you are able to hold. Ma'am. I'll forward your call to the department. C OK A Thank v ou. ->0P3 A Hello C Veah A 1 believe you're waiting for somebody in computers. Um is there something I can help you with or: SP C Well. I'll just come in and look for it. Um 1 was just going to look for some tape recorders. But I imagine you have them, right'!' To summarize, greeting forms for recipients representing businesses, services, or institutions include formulae such as "Good morning" or its equivalent, "Thank you for I 6 4 calling "How can I help you " or "Can I help you'^"" The ureeting Hello is observed only rarely. Greetings from callers take the form of Yes or Yeah, particularly in reply to greetings such as "Can I help you''"" Example 2^3 below demonstrates the described greetings from the callers Other times, callers greet with "Hi"" and "Hello"" (the latter occurring to a much lesser extent) as shown in example 4? 14 and i# 1 (2;^3) A Material and Mechanical Vlay I help you'' --> C L m yes. 1 was calling, someone was going to be coming out working on our furnace, and I just wanted to find out uh if they are going to be coming at a particular time. (4rr\4) OP A: Good morning. Pets Hospital. --> C Hi Can you check and see if my cat has been vaccinated for Feluke'' (I -I) A Journal Depaitnient, .Adrina speaking. C L h yes Hello I'd like to place an order While a majority (66° o) of the ver\' first turns for calls made to businesses or serv ices contain greetings along with self-identification of the business reached, this is not the case with calls made to \ arious offices of the university In fact, this is one of the major differences between calls made to businesses and university offices as has been observed in the corpus: only about 30° o of the calls to universities or colleges feature greetings in the first turn by the recipients .Self-identification only (type 4) is apparently the most typical way of answering calls made to uni\ ersity/college department offices. This difference 1 6 5 perhaps reflects the nature of the uni\ ersities and colleges as institutions for research and learning compared uith the more business or service oriented (thus general public relation oriented) nature of these enierpnses There are. howev er, six calls (out of the twenty) which contain greeting along with self-identification These calls seem to feature some characteristics that are more similar with businesses or services in general Specifically, these are calls made to a ticket otTice, which is more oriented to serv ice for a general audience, the health center on campus, registrar's otTice. the general intbrmation number for the extended university, the general number for the language center on campus, and a campus department office. .All the offices reached for these six calls, with the exception of the last, seem to be more oriented to providing service for the general public than dealing with academic affairs on campus. The use of language in the initial greeting may retlect such an orientation. (b) Identification Self-identification refers to the pronouncing of the names of the businesses or institutions reached w ith or w ithout the names of the individuals answering the phone. As long as the business or institute is identified, it is considered self-identification. Except for one call (2° o). the opening of w hich can not be determined due to a delay in onset of recording, all the recipients unfailingly identity- the names of the businesses or institutions. Caller self-identification, on the other hand, seems to depend on the nature of calls and therefore is not an indispensable sequence of the telephone conversation for T calls There seems to be a distinction between two types of calls: calls for general information and calls for specific requests or transactions for which caller identification is required. When callers I 6 6 request some general information about either products and serv ice, the identity of the individual party calling does not seem to be called for As long as the purpose of the call is clear to the answerer, the conversation can proceed smoothly. .As a matter of fact, the statement of the purpose by the caller clearly projects his or her identity as a customer (or a potential one) and there is no need for caller identification unless the nature of the call requires it. Nevertheless, w hen callers intend to schedule (or reschedule) appointments, to discuss specifics about a given matter, or to seek assistance from a particular person, caller self-identification is expected and provided as the data reveal. Of the fifty-two calls, forty- two percent contains caller self-identification at the beginning. All the calls with caller self-identification fall into one of the following categories: to schedule (reschedule) or to check an appointment, to make a complaint, to discuss matters previously discussed with a particular person, to request information on (or related to) service requested by the caller, or to seek specific assistance from the recipient. The nature of these calls therefore requires information on the identity of the caller, and the data demonstrate etTectively the callers" judgment as to when self-identification is necessarv' in communication If we break down the calls into business type versus uni\ersity type, there initially seems to be a significant quantitative difference in patterning: callers self-identify themselves in approximately one-third of the calls (34°o ) for calls to businesses while almost half (-If^o) of the calls to university offices feature caller self-identification. However, when we examine each call closely, it becomes apparent that the statistical difference between the two groups is due to the difference in distribution of the different 1 6 7 types of calls between the two groups In other words, calls to university offices in the corpus contain a higher percentage of calls that are related to personal matters (rather than general information request) and in addition, there is a higher percentage of prior acquaintance between the interlocutors On the other hand, the proportion of calls for general information is higher for calls to businesses or services and only a few calls to businesses are made to pre\ iously acquainted parties. The different percentage distribution of these two types of calls and the difference in the relationship between the two parties thus account for the difference in percentage of caller-self identification between the two subsets of data (c) Phatic utterances The How areyou sequence is observ ed to be one of the core sequences of American telephone conv ersations, and yet in the corpus of the transactional calls collected for this study, it is only observ ed occasionally Out of the tlfty-tu o transactional calls, only se\ en calls include the How areyou sequence (13° o) Of all the seven calls, there is either prior acquaintance or previous contact between the two parties involved in the calling. This seems to suggest that the phatic sequence Howareyou is not unmarked or conventional for transactional calls for .Americans On the contrary, its occurrence in transactional calls is marked. Its inclusion in a transactional call suggests acquaintanceship and less social distance, a ditlerent relation from that between complete strangers engaged in conversations However, the Hcnvarevou sequence might play a different role in telemarketing calls, calls that are initiated by sales persons to households, an observation I 6 8 confirmed by my participants (But calls for telemarketing are not part of this study, and therefore will not be discussed ) The sequence of openinus in the fitiy-two transactional calls is shown in Table 4.7, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. ABLE 4 7 AA: Transactional \=52 Openinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetin: 100 Greetinu bv A 51 Greetinu bv C S6 Acknov\ ledument Identification 100 Self ID bv A 100 Affirmina .A's ID bv C 0 SeiflDbvC 41 Phatic utterances 1 6 9 B. Statement of Purpose Except for those thirteen percent of the calls that demonstrate the Howareyou sequence and the few calls which seem to have difficulty in getting through, the purposes of the calls are usually made clear in the callers" first turn This is a difterent structural position than the anchor position which follows the reply to the second Howareyou sequence in calls to acquaintances, as Schegloft'(1986) observes. Purposes of calls are presented in different forms, either as statements or inquiries In most of the calls, purposes are presented in the form of statements. For example, "I am calling to make an appointment "" "I w as wondering if you sell tape recorder with really good microphone "1 wanted to ask you a question "" "I ve got a complaint about our vvater bill ."" In addition to statements, callers also express their purposes of calls through inquiries such as "Can you tell me w hen Dr. Ste\ enson is going to be in there'^"" In terms of politeness strategies, expressions range from more courteous linguistic realizations to forms with few or no hedging devices. The former, for example, refer to inquiries such as the t'ollowinu "Would it be possible to get an appointment with sports medicine today by any chance '"" (1^19) This is a call directed to the Student Health Service on campus With the use of both phrases Would it be possible and by any chance, the caller reduces the imposition of the inquiry substantially, rendering the request in an extremely polite wa\' What nuitivates the use of the courteous inquiry derives largely from the caller s awareness that it is usually difficult to schedule an appointment on the same day with campus health ser\ ice Therefore, by attaching some softening devices, the caller shows both her awareness of the unlikelihood of getting an appointment on the same day I 7 (> (and her appreciation ofan appointment ifher request could be granted) as well as her politeness in presenting a request On the other hand, the same caller employs a direct inquiry for another call to request some information for a conference Her statement of purpose is unhedged in this case "Do you have information on Language Symposium on the Romance Languages'^" For this call, she put forth her purpose of calling clearly to the person answering as this telephone number is listed as the contact number for information on the conference While callers sometimes express their purpose of calling explicitly in the form of inquiries, for example. "Can you "" or in explicit statements such as "I wanted to. " or "I needed to there are situations in which callers convey the purposes of calls in statements without using words such as want, need or would like to Yet given the context of the telephone calls, the purposes of the calls are understood by the interlocutors easily. For instance. (3;?20) A; Thank you for calling Star Copier Can 1 help you'^ ~> C: Hi. Um I was just there a little w hile ago and made some copies A. Uh hum —> C: I think I left a brown envelope with my son's report card in it. Although the caller did not actually say "I am calling to . " or "Can you help check. . ." her purpose of calling was made clear to the answerer she wanted to check if the item described was in fact left at the store. As has been demonstrated repeatedly by studies in discourse showing that a request may be realized in manv forms, the caller's account of leaving behind a brown envelope conveyed etTectively the intention of asking for help with I 7 I checking on the envelope. Naturally, the recipient ofthe call immediately replied that the envelope was there, and therefore the communication was successful. The corpus suuuests that for calls to businesses and services, callers tend to present their purposes w ith relatively formal language choice One of the participants specifically mentioned that in calls to businesses, tor example, she would ask for directions by saying "Can you tell me where you are located'^" which she would never use with a friend for the same purpose. Instead, she might simply say to her friend, "i just called to get directions to your house " Here, for the hypothetical business call, we have a request phrased as an inquiry but it changes into a declarative sentence in a call to a friend. The key vvord uet. furthermore, will be replaced b\ the key word located. Discussing the relation betueen politeness language and the conte.xt, one of my participants summed it well "Different contexts have difTerent parameters." In other words, what constitutes politeness in one context may not be perceived the same way in another context. The same panicipant discussed some of the basic principles she always tried to follow when making business calls be "explicit, detailed, brief and clear." Another participant mentioned that for business calls, one tends to show politeness also through intonation and the tone of \oice With friends, she will be informal and might even make a joke when asking for help for example, "Mary, help' 1 need your help." Not only do calls to businesses differ from calls to friends in terms of their context of formality, participants' difTerent perceptions of politeness will also afTect language choice, as discussed bs some of m\- participants One participant defined her perception of politeness as the equi\ alent of closeness or friendliness "I am an informal person," she 1 7 2 said. Therefore, while others uenerallv consider Would vou please to be a more polite form of expression, she perceives it as distant, not polite From her poim of view, ""Can you tell me..." is more friendlv The general consensus of my participants is that the context of business calls constraints language choice, and therefore callers tend to use language that is more formal than the language used in calls to friends and families. C. Closing (a) Pre-closing Pre-closing is observed onlv in three cases (less than 6%) among all of the T calls in this group, which suggests that initiation of closing overall is brief Once closing is initiated, it is accomplished almost immediately In other words, there is little "side tracking' w hich prok>ngs the process of closing Giv en that fifty-two calls is a considerable number, the absence of pre-clo.sing in ninety-four percent of the calls projects a salient pattern of discourse: business calls close in a straight manner, in w hich pre-closing is a highly unusual or marked phenomenon As for the occurrence of pre-closing in the three calls, let us examine them one by one. The first one is a call between acquaintances: a graduate student and a secretary. After the caller told the recipient that she needed to am, which was the initiation of closing, she asked if the recipient was going to the party that night as an afterthought. It should be made clear here that the topic about going to the pany was not mentioned in the previous part of the telephone conversation It is this inquir\- that opened up more discussions I 7 3 between them, thus the presence of pre-closing Clearly, this is a marked case because the interlocutors discusscd topics beyond what was focused on in the body of the telephone call itself and they were acquaintances, w hich is atypical of business calls in general. In the second call, the caller first initiated closing by saying "Thank you very much." Then she thought of another question, and it led to more discussion on the new topic. This initiation of closing thus turned into pre-closing The third call is presented below 0^7) .\ You. you migin just ask them if we were to buy one, uh through your book store, if they would receive a discount. C L'h hum A OK'^ C OK and urn --> PC Thank you very much .All right Would > ou want my name'l' You can call me back if if thev indicates that is the case. C OK A It's Brcnda C Uh hum A and my direct line is si.\ three five C L h hum A three fi\ e eight se\ en. C three five eight se\en A 70K C //OK (C then asked for permission to use the recording) A OK IC Take care \'ou ha\ e a good day C: Thank vou. LT Bve The caller had wanted to terminate the call, and therefore initiated the closin". Yet the recipient was eager to otTer more help and gave the caller her name and telephone number 1 7 4 after the caller s "Thank you "" This brought about the occurrence of pre-closing because a new topic was under discussion In the first two cases of pre-closinji. it is the callers who pre-closed the talk and again it is their introduction of new topics that delayed the closing, fn the third case, it is the caller who attempted to close the talk, but closing was delayed by the recipient's otfering of more information In an attempt to compensate for her delaying of the closing, the recipient initiated the termination of talk at the end. making this a marked case since closings were predominantly initiated by callers in T calls (b) Initiation of closinu As telephone calls are initiated by callers, it is perhaps logical to expect telephone conversations to be brought to a close by callers under normal circumstances. This is what has been observ ed for most of the data. A majority of the closing is initiated by callers. For T calls, closing is achieved through ditTerent forms of Thank you or Thanks a lot in most cases Therefore, in the closing section, as Schegloft"and Sacks (1073) observe, there is a signature tor types of telephone calls. Thank you or its equivalent forms, based on the data collected in this studv, serves as the signature for transactional calls. Other forms for closing calls include the few occurrence of 1 got to run. I'll see vou then, or I'll see vou soon, which are rare and are only observed in conversations between interlocutors who are acquainted with each other prior to the telephone calls. There are six calls, however, that feature a ditTerent interactional pattern with regard to initiation of closing it is the recipient instead of the caller who initiates the closing. One of them is a follow-up call. Another one is a call that ends with 1 will call vou back. In this case, as the recipient was not able to assist the caller tor the matter discussed, she told the caller that she would get back to her One call (3#7) will be discussed later in this section. Three other calls seem to suuuest that the recipients are in a rush to end the conversation The follovvinu is a good example illustrating such a case (6sl4) A: No, that was Denise C: Oh. OK A; OK'^ C: OK //is she good too ' —> A: .'/'All right ~> Thank you ~> Bye-bye C: Bye The tact that there is overlap between C"s "Is she good too''" and A"s "All right" suggests that .A. did not realize C still wanted to ask another question after her OK. Therefore, there is overlap between .A and C"s utterances. A"s "All right" is probably not meant to take the turn from the caller However, atter the "All right" utterance, A not only neglected C"s question without responding to it. but also went ahead initiating closing and leave-taking within one turn This indicates a clear intentional control of the termination of the conversation without asking for the interlocutor's consent. For most T calls, after the initiation of closing which is realized through linguistic forms such as Thank you or Thanks a lot, leave-taking ensues as the very next, and last, exchange (or utterance) of the conversation The most typical number of turns for the closing section is two, and more than half of the calls fall into this category. 1 7 6 (c) Phatic utterances It has been established in pre\ ious parts of the discussion that Thank you and its variant forms function as the initiation of closing in business calls. It needs to be explained that the reply to customers" Thank you is either in the form of You are welcome or Thank you for calling for most calls Whether it is the former or the latter, neither is considered as a phatic utterance for the present analysis The initial Thank you from the customers is categorized as initiation of closing (unless it is not in such staictural position) and therefore, will not be perceived as a phatic utterance, a point that has been made in the section on definitions of phatic utterances (Chapter 3) There are five calls in which phatic utterances are observed out of the total of fifty-two (10%). The presence of phatic utterances in those five call seem to derive from one of two reasons: strong appreciation from customers or acquaintanceship along with tliture contact planned following the time of the call To illustrate. I will give one example of each type (U20) C OK. uell PC Thank you ver\- much. (C asked another question about billing.) C Well IC Thank you so much tor your help ///on this A: ///Oh. you're welcome —> C: OK / Sure appreciate it A: //C'') call when vou get next bill. C OK A: OK'^ C Great A; All right C Thanks again. LT A: Bye-b\e 1 7 7 C: Bye-bye This is the same call that teatures pre-closing as discussed betbre In this call, the caller complained about the horrendous water bill she recei\ ed and requested an inquir\' from the water company At the end of the conversation, the caller felt extremely appreciative of the assistance of the recipient and expressed her gratitude and satisfaction three times in various ways as indicated by arrows in the transcript The closing section took nine turns, which is much longer than the av erage for this group This is a clear example of caller's repeatedly expressing her strong appreciation of the help received, thus ending the call with phatic utterances Another reason for the presence of phatic utterance seems to be the combination of both previous acquaintanceship and contact in the immediate future, which is a circumstantial factor (4;^12) C. Cool A: No problem. IC C: Thanks —> A: See you then^ C: =See you later LT A; Bve-bve C: Bye In this case, the caller and the recipient are acquainted with each other. Moreover, the caller was calling to make sure the recipient would be in the otfice in the next hour or so when she went there. That is uhy there was the reference to seeing each other later. Had it not been for the caller's planned visit to the office, there might not have been the reference to future contact I 7 8 On the whole, the presence of phatic utterances in T calls is marked, and there are always special conditions which prompt the presence of phatic remarks in those calls. (d) Leave-takinu Leave-takinu in English telephone con\ ersation is realized in the form of Good-bye. Bye, or Bye-bye as observed in the corpus While closing is seldom initiated by recipients (13%), leave-taking is initiated by recipients close to half the time (45° o). Furthermore, in more than one-fourth of the calls (27° o). either overlap or simultaneous leave-taking is evidenced The increase in recipient-initiated leave-taking and in overlapped leave-taking seems to suggest that initiating leave-taking may be different from initiating closing: initiation of closing is perhaps more perceived to be callers" right. Nevertheless, initiation of leave-taking may entail dillerent meaning, function, and interpretation. For a gi\ en call, since the caller in most cases has already indicated the desire to close the talk, it is appropriate and perhaps necessar\- for the called party to be cooperative and show mutual agreement The fact that there is more o\ erlap and simultaneous talk for leave-taking also supports such an interpretation. It is worth noting that there is twenty- seven percent of either ox erlap or simultaneous talk for leave-taking. Such overlap or simultaneous talk is not e\ idenced in any other component of the telephone conversations in the corpus. Interviews with my participants have also confirmed that overlap in leave-taking is not uncomfortable for most One of them mentioned that she would not feel comfortable w ith overlaps in the content part of talk, but overlaps in the evaluative part (to which "Good bye" belongs) are ditVerent 0\ erlaps in such cases are "perfectly acceptable." Another I 7 9 participant voiced a similar \ie\v That is probably because "there is no real information involved, she said, and overlaps in leave-taking just seemed normal to her The observed overlaps suggest that simultaneous leave-taking may not signal taking the floor away from the interlocutors, but on the contrar\-. it may indicate a partnership. In this particular structural position for conversations ~ the last slot, violation of the principle of one person talking at a time may not be a problem, but an indicator of understanding and cooperation. As Good-bve represents leave-taking, we naturally expect a return from the addressee to whom the first Good-bye is uttered. Most (80°'o) of the calls in fact do feature reciprocal leave-taking Nevertheless, there are three calls (6"o) in which callers" leave-taking is not returned, and there are six calls (\ 2°o) in which the recipients initiate the leave-taking but receive no reciprocal response in return from the callers There are an additional six calls with no endings available fur \arious reasons (tape coming to its end, leaving a message or transferring to talk with a male) There are two calls that end differently from the rest of the telephone conversations One of them terminates with Thank you but without the Good-bye sequence (2#3). A: As soon as 1 come across the work order, uh. I'll give you a call. Do you want me to call you at this number' C; U::m yes [please A [OK As soon as 1 come across the work order, like I said, ITl give you a call But 1 know it s not going to be done today. C Hum. that's odd OK Thank you —> A. You're welcome I 8 (I The absence of leave-taking for this call is due to the fact that the caller felt frustrated and perplexed First, there was no work order put in for their house although both the company co\ ering the house and the estate agent told them the order had been arranged. Secondly, the heating sen. ice called was not able to provide timely service when the caller and her family most needed heat for the house Thirdly, the service representative answering the call did not apologize for the inconvenience to the customer but emphasized the impossibility of providing timely serv ice, which aggravated the caller's frustration fijrther. Therefore, the absence of leave-taking in this case is not incidental: it reflects the caller's anger and fnistration \sith both the service and the service person answering the phone. These observations ha\e been verified by the caller in my interview. The other case that shous marked difference from the rest of the closings is a call made to an office on campus .As the intended pany was not available, the answerer closed the conversation (2F?IO) A: Hi, Monica is not here right now. C: OK, ril just tiA' to gel back to her later A; OK ~> Bye-bye ~> C; Thank you In this case, the closing was initiated by the answerer of the call who seemed to be in a rush to close the call, according to the caller Given that the recipient could not have said Thank you to close the talk. Bye-bye was the only option left. For the caller, simply to reply with Bye-bye seems to be lacking in some way. and a Thank you might better express her appreciation of A s help in answering the phone and looking for the requested party. I 8 I Although Bye-bye and Thank you are uttered as an adjacent pair, they do not seem to be in the right order: the pair carried out the communicativ e task of closing the conversation in their own unique way The sequence of closing in the fifty-two transactional calls is shown in Table 4 8, along with the percentage of calls uhich includes each element. TABLE 4 8 AA: Transactional N= 52 ClosioM Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing 6 Initiation of closing 100 Initiation by A Initiation by C 85 Simultaneous initiation Phatic utterances 10 Leave-taking 98 Initiation by A 46 Initiation by C 20 Simultaneous initiation 28 1 8 2 4.2.2 Interactional Calls The number of I calls by native speakers of American English in the corpus is relatively small: altogether there are nine calls that are counted as I calls, including two return calls. The recipients of these calls are mothers, a sister, a former landlady, and friends. The content of the calls suggests that the interlocutors in seven of the calls keep frequent contact with each other This is not the case for two of the calls. There are two characteristics of interactional calls first, the purpose of interactional calls is essentially to keep contact with or to show concern for the party called. There are no specific matters lo be discussed. Therefore, there is no imposition involved by definition (except the timing of the call may have the potential for causing inconvenience to the party called). Nevertheless, as the intention is essentially to maintain a relationship, to show concern for and rapport with the other paay. such calls are by nature appreciated by the recipients. SecondK. these calls feature a relatively close relationship (or little distance) between the caller and the party called. That is because for interlocutors who keep contact for purely interactional reasons, the relationship is usually close. Of the nine calls, four are between friends, one is between a former tenant and her landlady who have become fi'iends, one is between sisters, and three are between daughters and mothers. 1 8 3 A. Opening (a) Greetinu As has been observ ed b\ many scholars studying American telephone conversation (e.g. ScheglofTand Sacks. 1 Hopper. 1992). Hello is the most typical answer to a summons. For this set of recorded calls. Hello is the only form of answer to summons. For calls made to friends including a call to a former landlady, all the callers addressed the recipients by name in their tirst turn (the second turn of the call). Calls made to sister and mother, on the other hand, do not show the same pattern. The greeting Hello and Hi are used without addressing terms e.\cept in one case (when the caller addressed her mother). It is interesting to note that in those family calls. Hello is not only used as greeting in the first turn bui in the second turn as well. For example, in the call between two sisters, we have the following greeting exchange. (3f?2) OP A: Hello --> C Hello --> .A Well hello In this case. C "s reply to .\'s first Hello is different from the usual reply for callers Instead of addressing the recipient, w hich is more common in most calls, the caller greeted the recipient jokingly By repKing with another Hello, the caller identified herself in a unique way which was familiar to the sister. The ensuing "Well hello::" is an indication of the recipients familiarity, rather than surprise, with the second Hello. The use of three Hello in three consecuti\ e turns constitutes a playful greeting and unique identification I 8 4 sequence between intimate interlocutors The use of Hello in such manner has been observed by Scheuloff{ 1970, 1QS6) (b) Identification Most of the calls in this group accomplish caller identification by voice. That is to say, most of the callers did not ideniitV' themselves after they greeted the recipients. In fact, this is common for intimate relationships or for interlocutors who keep frequent contact. As voice recognition is preferred, there is no need for intimates and frequent callers to identify themselves There are two calls with caller-identification. The first one is a call to a friend whom the caller has not been in touch with for a while, and the other one is a call to a former landlady The lack of recent contact between the two parties seems to warrant the need for caller self-identificaiion (c) Phatic Utterances Out of the nine calls, eight calls contain some phatic utterances after the identification sequence How are \ ou"^ or How are you doing'^ are the prevailing forms of phatic expression (57° o) Other phatic utterances include Is this the real vou'^ which plays with voice recognition, and Sorrv it took me so long when the caller returns a call to her friend. Other phatic contents that are mentioned before callers move onto the main topics include interlocutors" prc\ ious contact w ith each other in addition to their state and general well- being. The only call that features the absence of phatic talk is a call in which the recipient asked "What's up " after the identification exchange. 1 8 5 OP A: Hello C Hi. Jean --> A: Hi(lauuhter) --> Wliat'sup'^ C Weil, you know v\ hat. you really needed to come to the party last night. It seems that A"s question What 's up'' serv es the function of preemption (Scheulof^'. 1986) of C's potential phatic moves It elicits the main reason of the call by asking for it directly, therefore by-passing the phatic sequence and enforcing the announcement of the purpose of calling ScheglotTl 1986) considers questions such as What's up"^ to be an attempt by the called party to return the anchor position to the caller But this may not be the only reason in the above situation. A's What's up'^ may partly show her recognition of the caller's voice rather than simpK passing on the anchor position to the caller. In fact, A could hav e returned the turn to C if she just replied with Hi. However, by asking What's up'' A is expressing her eagerness to t"ind out the purpose of calling. Most of my participants interpret such an inquir\ as an indication of the recipient's being engaged in, or need to attend to. some other activities at the moment Hearing such an inquiry, the participants commented, the callers would mo\ e onto the main purpose rapidly. Examining the conversations of this group as a whole, phatic talk before the introduction of the main topic occurs in an overwhelming majority of the calls (89%) in spite of the fact that interactional calls are made on the same general .subject - the well- being of the interlocutors The absence of it in the only exceptional case derives from the recipient's inquir> What's up (an indication of her being busy at the moment according to the interpretations of my participants), which in t'act pre-empts the potential phatic sequence 1 8 6 The sequence of openings in the nine interactional calls is shown in the Table 4.9. along with the percentage of calls w hich includes each element TABLE 4 9 AA: Interactional N-'=9 Opening Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greeting 100 Greetinu bv A 100 Greetinu bv C 89 Acknowledument 100 Identification 67 Self ID bv A Artlrminii A's ID bv C 67 Self ID bv C Phatic utterances 89 B. Statement of Purpose After the opening, most I calls continue with inquiries about the party called regarding their well-being in general or about specific ev ents or aspects in their lives. Inquiries about life of the called party in general may take the form of a question such as So: what's happening ' but sometimes specific questions are preferred, for instance. How is vour cold'' 1 8 7 or Are vour visitors uone'^ If it is a Happy-birthday-call, for example, the purpose is distinctive with birthday-wishing expressed at the beginning. For the two return calls, the callers state their purposes by giving apologies for not being there when being called last time or for taking long to respond. For example. (5^6) OP A: Hello C Hi. Helen A: Hi C This is Janet A Hi. Janet PH C How are you ' •A.: Oh fine C Good A: C //(•'•') —> SP I'm sorr\ I wasn't there the other day when you called. (2-13) OP A Hello C Sara A Hi —> C Sorry took nie so long. As to the specitlc domain of the conv ersation for those nine interactional calls, general well-being is the most common topic, which is discussed in 89° o of the calls. Family and school work constitute the next tuo most often discussed topics in descending order. C. Closing Comparing the closings for I calls with those of a transactional nature, several patterns become salient: First. 1 calls do not close in as linear a fashion as T calls do The high percentage of pre-closing is evidence of such a characteristic Secondly, there are phatic utterances in e\ er\ closing. Thirdly, recipient-initiated closing increases considerably. I 8 8 (a) Pre-closinu More than half of the calls (56°o) in this group feature pre-closing (For T calls, pre- closing only amounts to less than six percent ) The substantial difference is worth noting, suggesting that different relationships and the different nature of calls produce different closing procedures For 1 calls, the first indication of the desire to terminate the call may not be immediately acted upon On the contrar\', participants often find themselves having more to say before they can close the conversation Therefore, pre-closing is a characteristic of I calls (b) Initiation of closinu Closing is realized in various forms but all of them seem to address some of the phatic themes, be it future contact (e g Talk to you later), expression of gratitude (e.g. Thank you for calling), good wishes (e g Take care), or regards to families (e.g. Say Hi to . ). Closing is initiated by recipients in half (-^Co) of the total calls in this group, but only thirteen percent {13''o) in the T group The higher percentage of called-party initiated closing may be accounted for by two factors first, the relationship between interlocutors in I calls is closer than that between interlocutors for T calls, and therefore, the "ownership" of initiation of closing may be more up to the participants to negotiate. Secondly, for 1 calls, there is often pre-closing which may partly account for the higher percentage of called-pany-initiated closing In other words, it is not that the called parties for I calls tend to ignore the callers and therefore initiate the closing on their own. On the contrar>', since in some cases, the callers ha\ e alreadv indicated their intention to terminate the talk with 1 8 9 pre-closinu attempts (but ha\e not accomplished the initiation immediately), the recipients might demonstrate cooperation and understanding in assisting with the closing, especially in intimate relationships, as in the tbllowing example (3??4) —> PC C Oh. I d better go (C asked tor permission to use the recording.) C: Well, have a wonderful birthday (more talk on birthday) C; Well, ue'll tr\ to call you on your birthday (more about presents) C OK --> IC A Thanks for calling. C OK. /Talk to > ou later A / Say. say love to Dan and Br\an. C OK luill LT A Bve C Bye-bye Here, we can see that C o\ ertly announced her intention to close the call when she said "i'd better go." yet the interlocutors ended up discussing other topics again. Therefore A"s "Thanks for calling" serv es as the initiation of the closing, although it is not the initial remark for closing (c) Phatic utterances Before the closure of the interactional conversations, interlocutors usually cover some (or all) of the following phatic themes in their closing exchanges (including the pre-closing section): expression of gratitude tor calling, promise for fijture contact, regards to families, and good wishes to each other In fact, all the 1 calls in the corpus contain phatic utterances in their closinu sections 1 9 (I (d) Leave-takinn Leave-taking in 1 calls siiows a significant increase in recipient-initiation compared with leave-taking in T calls In I calls, three-fourths (75%) of leave-taking is initiated by the called party rather than the callers With the exception of one call between a daughter and her mother, which shows non-reciprocal leave-taking, and another call being cut off by the telephone company, which !ea\ es the leave-taking incomplete, all the leave-takings consist of reciprocal exchanges of giiod-bye The sequence of closing in nine 1 calls is shown in Table 4.10 below, along w ith the percentage of calls which includes each element. 1 9 I TABLE 4 10 AA: Interactional N =9 Closinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closinu 56 Initiation of closing 100 Initiation bv A 50 Initiation bv C 50 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 100 Leave-takinu 100 Initiation bv A 75 Initiation bv C Simultaneous initiation 4.2.3 Interactional-Transactional Calls The number of I-T calls comprises a total of forty-eight telephone calls, accounting for close to half (44°o) of all the telephone calls collected from native speakers of American English. Within this group, further breakdowns have been attempted in order to examine possible variation due to the nature of calls (or degree of imposition), the social status 1 9 2 (power variance), and the social relation (distance variance) between the interlocutors. However, the breakdowns ha\ e not revealed any systematic ditTerences Unless specified, what is observ ed will be general description of the whole group of I-T calls A. Opening (a) Greeting Similar to what is observed in I calls, almost all the answers to the summons of the telephone calls are in the form of Hello. There are three calls that manifest different greetings, but as will he demonstrated, ever\- case has some special circumstances that accounts for the variance The first call is 2-16. a call actually m.ade to an otTice rather than a residence. Yet this call is placed in this I-T categor\ based on careful consideration of the relationship between the interlocutors, the reason for the call, and the actual content of the call. As the call is directed to the recipient at work, it is natural that she answers the phone by identifying herself and the office For the call the first recipient (husband of the intended recipient) answered the call with "Morning. SUA. Suansons." which was being commented on moments later by his wife when she came to answer the phone She said "Thinks he's at work. He almost said Savers." After that, both the caller and the recipient laughed about it. It seems that the husband was answering the phone without realizing that he was at home, not at work, thus we have Morning along with the first two letters of the name of the store. The last 1 «> 3 exceptional call is one that began with an answer machine playing its message Therefore, a Hello was not available In callers" first turn, an o\ er\v helming majority (84° o) of the callers greet the recipients in their first turn Hi is the dominant form for callers" greeting, while on a few occasions, there is Hello As Schegloff( observes. Hi signifies the recognition of the voice of the speaker. If we exclude those calls that are answ ered by persons other than the intended recipient, the proportion of callers greeting in their first turn rises to eighty-nine percent. We should also note that more than half of the calls feature callers affirming the recipients" identification by addressing them in their first turn along with greeting, (b) Identification Callers self-identitled themselv es in half (50°'o) of the calls. Calls in which caller self- identification tends to be absent are either calls to intimate relations such as sisters or mothers, or calls to unacquainted persons. In other v\ords. if the relations between the two parties are at either end of the continuum of the social distance - intimate or distant, there tends to be lack of caller self-identification. The corpus displays some patterns that characterize conditions when caller self-identification is absent: First, if the caller is confident that her \ oice can be recognized with the voice sample of the brief greeting, there is no self-identification. Examples of such cases include calls between mother and daughter, sisters, and good friends. In fact, there appears to be a correlation between absence of addressing the recipient and absence of self-identification. There are thirteen calls in which the callers did not address the party called (but greeted); neither did thev identifV' themselves. The close correlation between the absence of 1 9 4 addressing the recipients and the absence of caller self-identification seems to suggest callers' confidence in the recipients" ability to recognize the callers with the callers" minimal voice sample of greeting alone. Secondly, if the caller recognizes (or assumes) that the recipient is not the intended addressee of the call, there is usually no self-identification from the caller unless the caller is acquainted with the person answering the phone In such a case, the caller usually asks for the intended recipient and may identify him/herself only when the intended recipient answers the phone Several Cc!lls in the corpus demonstrate such a pattern. It should be recognized that part of the reason for the double absence (of addressing recipient and of caller self-identification as discussed in the presious paragraph) also derives from the fact that in cases when the answerers are not the intended parties called, neither addressing nor self-identification is possible or necessary. Thirdly, sometimes caller identification is accomplished in an unconventional way. For example, in two calls to their mothers, both callers respectively identified themselves in a unique way in one call, the caller said, it s me "" Similarly, in another call, we have "it's moi."" In a call to a "good friend"", ihe caller used the same feature: "It's me."" Clearly, there is identification of the caller in all three cases but it is not achie\ ed through name re\ elation but a unique way of caller identification. It is only in intimate and close relations that this unique means of identification can be realized and exert effectiveness. (c) Phatic utterances The corpus suggests that phatic exchanges precede the main purpose of I-T calls for the majority of calls (71°o), a feature not found in T calls. Phatic utterances take the same 1 9 5 forms as those in [ calls How are voii ' or How are you doing' are the most often observed forms of expression For the several calls w ithout such pre-topic phatic utterances, which are marked, three reasons seem to emerge social distance, special type of call, or special circumstances First, there is no Howareyou sequence in any of the three calls taking place betw een interlocutors who have no previous acquaintanceship with each other Secondly, the special nature of the calls may render the Howareyou sequence irrelevant or unneces.sary in ^ome ca.ses. For instance, for follow-up calls or here-we-are calls, the Howareyou sequence does not occur That is because in the former case, the two parties have just talked over the phone minutes before For example, in the case of a daughter calling who started with i forgot something," we can clearly see this is a call immediately following the pre\ ious one. In the other case, the daughter has just spent some time with the mother and after she got home, she called her mother to inform her of her safe arrival In both of these cases, the phatic sequence is left out. Thirdly, sometimes special circumstances may have affected the routine language use. The call below (6^18) is an example The unusual circumstance is that while waiting for her sister-in-law Karina to get to the phone, the caller Maria heard Karina's son in the background speculating about the purpose of her call to his mother, "It's Maria. Calling about swimming •' That is probablv v\hy Maria's opening of conversation is different from the rest of her calls to Karina in the data (her other calls to Karina all feature the Howareyou sequence ) (6#18) (The boy is talking to his mother in the background: 1 9 6 "It's Maria. Calling about swimming. ) 0P2A: Hello C Hi Karina A Hi —> C So funny, "caiiing about swimming." A Yes (laughter from both) There are three calls thai seem to rev eal no apparent reason for the absence of the phatic sequences . but these only constitute six percent of the total number of calls. Apparently, for calls made bv female native speakers of American English, phatic sequence prior to the main purpose of call is the predominant pattern for I-T calls It should be mentioned that not only do most calls in this category feature Howareyou sequences, two-thirds of the 1-T calls cover some phatic themes after the discussion of the main topic. That is to say. most interlocutors engage themselves in further phatic exchange of information beyond the Howareyou sequence level after the main topic has been discussed, sharing their experiences and feelings about their lives in general. The domains covered include general welfare, school work, family, job, and things of common interest The sequence of openings in the forty-eight I-T calls is show n in the Table 4.1 1, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. I 9 7 TABLE 4 I AA: Interactional-Transactional N==48 Openinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetinu 100 Greetinu bv A 100 Greetirm bv C 85 Acknowledument 60 Identification 67 Self ID bv A 0 AtTirminu A's ID bv C" 60 SelflDbvC 50 Phatic utterances B. Statement of Purpose All I-T calls ha\ e specific matters to discuss, and in that respect, there is similarity between T calls and I-T calls Houever. the way the reasons for calling are presented show some difference from that of T calls While T calls seem to feature both the extremely polite use of language such as "Would it be possible to by any chance" and direct statement such as "I need to make an I 9 8 appointment," the language used for I-T calls is less formal, shows more varieties, and features moderate hedging or softening strategies in some cases. In presenting purposes, tbrmal expressions such as "1 was wondering . . " or "I wondered which occur often in T calls are not observed in I-T calls. There are, in addition, more varieties for stating purposes of calls which are not as routinized as calls for transactional purposes It seems to he relatively common for callers to use modifiers such as just or quick to pinpoint the focus of the call For example, "T iust wanted to let you know that I called JB Hall ' I just wanted to tell you that I think I'm just not in the mood to go out tonight"" "Can 1 ask vou. like a quick question"^" All the underlined words clearly pinpoint and emphasize the purposes of calling. Either just or quick also implies that the call will be relatively brief suggesting that callers are concerned about the imposition the calls might constitute C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu As is the case with interactional calls, closings in this group are not always carried out in a linear fashion and therefore, pre-closmg is obser\ ed in close to one-third of the data (29%). Pre-closing is initiated by either the caller or the party called. (b) Initiation of closing The initiation of closing shows that in most calls (63°o), callers take the initiative in bringing the conversation to a close Recipient-initiated closing amounts to just over one fourth of the total (27" o). falling in-between that of T calls (13%) and I calls (50%). 1 9 9 (c) Phatic utterances Manifestinu a similar pattern with I calls with regards to the presence of phatic utterances prior to ciosiny telephone conversations, almost two-thirds (60° o) of the I-T calls evidence the two panies addressing phatic themes such as thanking, future contact, good wishes, and regards to families Two observations about the data can be made: one concerns the presence of thanking and the other pertains to the absence of phatic interaction in intimate relations. For almost all the calls categorized as in\ol\ ing some imposition on the called pany (calls that are asking for a favor regardless of its weight), expression of gratitude is present in closing sections except in one call which is between sister-in-lavvs. On the other hand, calls from daughters to mothers seem to feature the least phatic talk for closing. Since the daughter and mother in the particular calls under discussion have kept frequent contact, there is probably little need to \ erbalize promises of future contact. This obser\ ation of less phatic talk between callers with an intimate relation also supports Wolfson's"( 1989) findings about the difference in intimate \ ersus non-intimate relations such as acquaintances and status equal friends It is the emergent and insecure nature of the second relationship that enhances the need for people to signal and express solidarity in their language use, Wolfson explains. Closings between similar dyads in the CC set yield similar findings. Whereas it is the Thank you exchange that typifies closings for T calls, I-T calls clearly cover aspects of phatic interaction for closing, which is similar to I calls. 2 0 0 (d) Leave-takinu Similar to what has been obser\ ed in I calls and T calls, leave-taking consists of two turns with reciprocal exchanue being the norm. There are two cases only vvith three-turn leave-takings Whereas it is not clear if the three-turn leave-taking in one call might be due to some technical problems with the recipient s phone, the one call discussed below (SUA) is clearly a marked case (5f?4) C OK A OK -> C Bye' —> A. Will do -> C Thanks' This is a call in which the caller a.sked the landlady of her friend to pass on a message to her friend While the caller was closing by saying Bye. the recipient seemed to want to assure the caller that she would pass on the message. Consequently, she replied. "Will do " On hearing that, the caller responded with Thanks as a gesture of counesy and appreciation, regardless of the previous Bye that was already uttered. This seems to be an interesting example of how participants use language in the most appropriate way depending on the interactional needs in context, not just the rules in theor\'. There are a number of lea\ e-takings, however, that feature only one turn. Upon a closer examination, out of the ten calls without reciprocal leave-taking, half are calls between the same dyad. Specitlcally. it is the mother who did not return her daughter's good-byes When asked about her mother's leave-taking style, or the lack of it, the participant mentioned that she had noticed it before. "Sometimes I didn't realize it but she 2 » 1 already hung up " The daughter also stated that her mother did not enjoy talking over the phone and had a very pragmatic attitude with the use of phone. It might be due to the way she was brought up. the daughter speculated. Of the rest tlve calls that contain non-reciprocal leave-taking, one is again a call to a mother from a different particii)ant (again it is the mother who did not provide the leave- taking in return), one is a wrong number, with only three calls unclear as to the possible reasons for the one-turn lea\e-taking The sequence of openings in the foiiy-eight l-T calls is show n in Table 4.12. along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 (I 2 TABLE 4 12 AA. Interactional-Transactional N-48 Closinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closinu 29 Initiation of closinu 92 Initiation bv A 30 Initiation bv C 68 Simultaneous initiation Phatic utterances 75 Leave-takinu 100 Initiation bv A 42 Initiation bv C 39 Simultaneous initiation 19 4.3 Telephone Conversations in Chinese by Native Speakers of Chinese in the I'.S. There are sixty telephone conv ersations in Chinese recorded by native speakers of Chinese who resided in the L S at the time of the recording, twelve T calls, twenty-two I calls, and twentv-six l-T calls 2 0 3 4.3.1 Transactional Calls in C hinese Given that American Enulish is the dominant language used in the U S., it is conceivable that there are only a few businesses which otTer the option for customers to use the Chinese language instead of English for business transactions. Of the total twelve calls recorded, seven are made to long distance telephone companies, four to travel agencies owned or operated bv overseas Chinese, and one to a Chinese restaurant. A. Opening (a) Greeting Of the twelve calls, eight feature greetings (67%) (answers to summons) along with recipients identifv ing the names of the businesses at the first turn. For the other four calls, there is no greeting expression other than the announcement of the names of the businesses The most common answer for telephone companies follows the pattern of either greeting plus identification such as J "Thank you for calling Global' or identification plus ureeiinu such as j - ^ n'j. '.XinYu Long Distance Telephone Company Good morning". As a whole group, greeting by recipients occurs in two-thirds (57°o) of the calls There seems to be some difference in terms of greeting between the T calls in China and those in the L S First, there is percentage ditTerence: there is higher occurrence of greeting from the CC group (89''o) than the CA group (67%) Although as an discrete category, greeting by recipients shows a lower percentage for the CA group, greeting does not function exactly the same in the L^S business calls (C.A) as it does in the Chinese 2 0 4 context (CC) Greeting seems to be optional in the U S business answers because recipient-identification is the indispensable element in recipients" initial answer and has a priority. This is not the case with calls in China. Initial greeting constitutes the sole element of answer to summons for a majorit\ of the calls. Secondlv. "Thank you for calling " is a linguistic form not observed in the corpus recorded in China but is a common practice for greetings in the U S., particularly from telephone companies Thirdlv. whereas !'[" "Hello" is used for greeting by A in calls recorded in Shanghai. China about one-third of the time, it occurs only rarely in T calls conducted in the U S Fourthly, as the recipient answering calls for a given business does not know what language the customer prefers to use. the initial greeting is always in English unless the dialed number is designated as a special line for a different language, as in the case of telephone companies Therefore, for e.xample, we have the initial greeting from a Chinese restaurant in English "China Garden May I help you'.'" (b) Identification Without e.vception. all the businesses reached self-identified themselves in their answers whether in Chinese or English. The lOCo self-identification for businesses provides a sharp contrast with the way business calls are answered in China, where only eight percent of the calls include self-identification. Furthermore, in the U.S.. as the recipients all pronounced the names of the businesses reached at the beginning of the calls, the callers did not need to confirm the name of the businesses they w ere calling with the exception of one call wherein the caller probably did not catch the name of the business 2 0 5 reached. On the other hand, tor most T calls recorded in China, checking on the name of the businesses reached is a dominant feature For those Chinese T calls made in L' S . there is no caller self-identitlcation. However, the absence of caller-identitlcation is complex and two factors need to be mentioned: first, most of the calls in this group are made to obtain some information rather than conducting actual transactions o\ er the phone Therefore, the need for caller-identification might be reduced to some extent Secondly, for almost all the calls conducted in the U.S. to telephone companies, recipients always asked for the callers" names and phone numbers in the first turn before the callers had the chance to speak. Consequently, even if they had intended to identif\- themseK es. the callers would not have been able to do so. The example below provides us with a clear pattern of such openings. OP A: i(!| n: I J- i[i ii'i VIT t i IE >1- \ie xie ni da dian hua gei MT zhong wen fu wu bu thankthank you call phone gi\ e name Chinese ser\ice section Thank vou lor callinu MT Chinese service. r< ill til uo xing \u I surname Xu Good e\eninu .\[\ la.st name is \'u. —> ii'i |nl 111 fi'i JL qing wen dian hua hao ma ji hao please ask phone number what number May I have your number please"' C rfiijii- 5 I 0 UO shi wu \i ling I be fi\ e one zero This is fi\ e one zero uh hum 2 0 6 C; 0 6 3 liu liu san six six tliree A; uh hum C: 7 2 19 qi er yi jiu seven two one nine --> A. OK. i,'i |nj ih: ok qinu uen ni uui xinu Ok please ask you honor last name OK. May I ha\ e vour last name please'^ C: k'\ U- wo xinu Zhen 1 surname Zhen Mv last name is Zhen --> A: ij- fi- i; ji t.'r "I U /iV (^h IIU '& fl'J you shen me shi qiny ke yi bang ni fu vvu de ne have what matter can help you ser\ e PT Q What can 1 help you with'^ C: iqic iic ill )Hv •toj f/j: i^r • K oh wo jiu xianu qinu ma tan ni cha yi xia oh 1 just want please trouble you check once Would you please check for me (c) Phatic utterances Phatic utterances are not observed in any ot'the T calls in this category. The sequence of openings in the twelve Chinese T calls made in the U.S. is shown in Table 4.13. along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 0 7 TABLE 4 13 CA : Transactional N = 12 Openinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetinu 100 Greetinu bv A 67 Greetinu bv C 50 Acknovvledument 8 Identification 100 Self ID bv A 100 AfRrniinu A's ID bv C 8 Self ID bv C 0 Phatic utterances B. Statement of Purpose Other than calls made to long distance telephone companies (in the majority for this set of data), callers usually stated their purposes for calling directly in their first turn of speaking For example, (6ii?14) OP A: Northwest Travel C: uh ^1' .ji! uh dui bu qi 2 II S Lih som- uh Excuse me -> ii'i K ft'j fJL '!!i f/r '&• wo xianu qinu wen yi \ia na ge liu yue fen de ji piaojia qian I think please ask once that June PT plane ticket price I am caliinu to ask about the airfare in June There is exception in two cases in one case the caller asked if she could speak Mandarin in her first turn, in another case, the caller asked for a specific sales representative tlrst For those calls conducted to telephone companies, however, there is a different procedure. As we can see from the evample gi\en above (!:?3). callers are put through a number of inquiries before being able to express their reason for calling. In these cases, the very first thing customers are required to do is to identity their telephone numbers. Since telephone companies ha\e all their customers" serv ice information in their computer systems, the specification of the customer's phone number will enable representatives to assist customers more etliciemlv .A follow-up routine is to ask for the caller's name. As we can see, the way representatives from telephone companies open telephone conversations show s a patterned difference from other T calls, and statements of purpose are therefore delayed compared with other business calls. In terms of linguistic forms of requests, the most common e.xpression seems to be a variant of the form ill ti'i l"J h would like to ask..." However, the language used in a few calls shows marked attempts at intensifying politeness. For example, we have the example 1#3 given abo\o in which the caller used iHcWl f'j: "trouble you" and another 2 0 9 caller used the expression <•! .lii "Sorry to bother you." The use of these politeness markers resembles some politeness expression in the CC set for T calls C- Closing (a) Pre-closinu There are three calls (25° o ) to the telephone companies that show pre-closings. In all three calls, callers seemed to be ready to terminate the call and therefore initiated the first "Thank you " However, all three recipients (sales representatives) offered more information to the callers after hearing the first "Thank you." therefore turning the "Thank you" into pre-closing. (b) Initiation of closinu As TABLE 4 14 shows, almost all the calls (with one exception) feature initiation of closing. The one call that has a different pattern for closing is shown below. (6#13) A: OK'^ C OK A; !li' 4^ hao bu hao good not good OK'^ C: //OK. A: /OK --> LT Bye-bye --> C m iqi vie xie ni 2 1 (» thank thank \cui Thank you This call differs from others in that the recipient was in a rush to close the conversation Therefore, instead ot" waiting tbr the caller to take the initiative in closing, the recipient was in the lead first she asked the caller "OK" twice. Then without waiting tbr the usual "Thank you" trom the caller, the recipient initiated the leave-taking, thus pre empting the 'Thank You' sequence which usually precedes leave-taking. In response, the caller said f'j^ "Thank you'instead of "Bye." Similar to the pattern ob>^er\ed in T calls recorded in China, almost all the closings within this group of calls are initiated by the callers with the e.xception of one call (li?3, provided below) during which the initiation of closing shows overlap by A and C. But even in this case. .A did not initiate the closing on her own. The caller had actually indicated her intention to terminate the call earlier by her first "Thanks a lot.' However, this utterance overlapped with the recipient's remarks reminding the caller of the last day of the present promotional rate Therefore, the talk did not tertninate with the caller's first attempt to close the call due to the ov erlap. .After the caller mentioned that she would contact the company later. .\ immediately shifted to closing, a gesture to show sensitivity to customer's needs, which led to the overlap of the "Thank you" from both parties. (I^f3) --> c: u ri'i, I.Z li: i='j ii-j ('/- Wi ('fill hao de t"anzhenguo dao shi hou zai gen ni men lian xi good anyway 1 PP time again PR you PL contact OK. anyway, 1 will contact you then. A: fif ri'j. hao de good PT 2 I I OK c iii (\'j. hao de good PT OK A OK C, i'kf. hao good OK. -> IC fi: \ie \ie ni a thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot A: / 'iW m f'j; » VIT xie xie ni mt thankthank you name Thank \ ou for using MT C OK LT [Bye-bye A [Bye-bye Responses to callers" "Thank \OLf" takes several forms: 1. No response: 8°o 2. kf/OK: 8% 3. Response in the form of "Don't mention it: i7°o 4. iWWI (jj"Thankyou (forcalling x\)': S^o 5. (2) + (4) = OK+ "OK - Thank you": 25% 6. (3) + (4) = C "Don't mention it' ' "Thank you': 17°'o 2 1 2 7. Unable to be deciphered S^o 8. N/A (one case of absence of initiation closing as discussed before) Two patterns emerge from the above description: first, response to "Thank you' varies; it ranges from 4)' OK" to ' C "Don't mention it', or its other equivalents ItJiW- 4^ or fi: X; This suggests that (c) Phatic utterances One of the basic principles of coding in this study requires that an utterance is to be coded as belonging to one category only according to its primarv' flmction although the utterance might serve more than one function in a given context. Such a criterion is based on the needs for comparison .\s thanking in T calls all fijnction as initiation of closing, it is not treated as phatic content in addition to its structural function Excluding thanking which occurs in staictural positions of initiation of closing, no phatic talk is evidenced in any of the T calls (d) Leave taking All except one of the calls contain a leave-taking sequence, rendering an overwhelming majority of the occurrence of leave-taking in all T calls. If we compare the percentage with that of the T calls in China, there is a substantial difference: there is leave-taking in more than ninety percent ofCA calls compared with thirty-one percent for the CC group It is also interesting to note that there is equal distribution in 2 I 3 terms of initiation of lea\ e-takinu between the callers and the recipients: both callers and recipients initiate leave-takinu in a little ov er one-third of the calls. Furthermore, there are reciprocal exchanges for most of the leave-taking. There are two calls that manifest interesting patterns for closing sequence and therefore I v\ill discuss them in detail below (5#3) ic C: tJi: )J|:. iJi: LI'T m F'J; J' o na na na jiu xie xie ni le oh then then just thank thank you SFP Oh. all right, then, thanks a lot A: llf. hao hao bu ke qi Ok good not couiieous OK, all right. Don't mention it C: 111 iJiC K IK .ij. "2! ran hou gai lian uo guo lai chi then change dav 1 o\ er come eat And I'll go to your restaurant some other day. A; OK C .'llyWOj-' hao ma good Q OK-' LT A Bye ~> C xie xie o thank thank SFP Thanks a lot ~> A 11] i'li bu yong \ie no need thank Don't mention ii 2 1 4 In this illustration, closing was initiated by the caller and the recipient showed her cooperation in the closing. Yet after hearing the caller's f \}'X "I will go to your restaurant some other dav." w hich is another way of expressing the caller s appreciation for the information, the recipient probably deemed it proper to terminate the call and therefore said "Bye " first What is interesting is that the caller responded with "Thank you" but not with lea\e-taking Another example is the call 6? 13 which has been discussed in the previous section. (6#I3) .A: OK'^ C OK. A: kf ki"' hao bu hao good not good OK' C OK A OK --> LT Bye-bye C: i(j| f'h \ie xie ni thank thank you Thank you In this case, the IC sequence is pre-empted by the recipient through her initiation of leave-taking However, interestingly, the response from the caller is a "Thank you" instead of the second pair of the adjacent pair for leave-taking. It could suggest one of two different things: either the caller w anted to emphasize her appreciation of the help from the 2 1 5 recipient or lo make it clear to the recipient that she was aware that the normal procedure of closing had been disaipted by A In short, the absence of the initiation of closing in this case is not accidental but intentional, and the atypical closure is being noticed and the ensuing linguistic choice made by the caller in response is a reply demonstrating her sensitivity to the atypical structure of the utterance produced by the recipient. This is a case of the unconventional use of formulaic routines. The sequence of closings in the tw elve CA T calls is shown in Table 4. 14, along with the percentage of calls w hich includes each element 2 1 6 TABLE 4 14 CA: Transactional N Closinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closinu 2S Initiation of closing 92 Initiation by A 0 Initiation by C Ql Simultaneous initiation Phatic utterances 0 Leave-taking 92 Initiation by A 36 Initiation by C 36 Simultaneous initiation 28 4. 3. 2 Interactional Calls There are twenty-tw o I calls in this group. Almost all of the calls are made to friends residing in the US with one exception - a call made to the mother of one of the participants who lives in China 2 I 7 A. Opening (a) Greeting All the recipients answered the calls with "Hello" (in English) and only in few cases with Chinese I't" "Hello " E\en for calls with two openings, the second opening almost always began with "Hello" from the recipient There is one call (4;;1) that does not display the same greeting. This was a call to a friend who. the caller heard, had just had a car accident. The purpose of the call, therefore, was to see if the recipient vsas all right and to show consolation It was the husband of the intended recipient who answered the phone first, and he recognized the caller s voice. The intended recipient was then informed who the caller was and she also guessed why the caller was calling This led to the unusual beginning of the second opening: ( 4fr 1 ) -> 0P2A !• I'iJi |ni .i, ft'j |n] 3^l| J' ai yo wang jing tong zhi de wei wen dao le oh name comrade PT consolation arrive SFP Oh. here comes the consolation of comrade Wang Jing. Clearly. ll[li "Hello" is absent at the beginning of the conversation, yet the acknow ledgment of the caller, the prediction of the purpose of calling and the humorous way the recipient phrases it constitute a unique opening as well as an interesting greeting The lexical choice "consolation" expresses the recipient's appreciation of the call and her conjecture of the purpose of calling. The use of the formal "comrade' for such a casual conversation flinctions in two ways: it suggests familiarity and shared experience between them At the same time, it adds a humorous touch to the conversation. 2 1 8 Furthermore, the fact that the recipient was half joking indicates that she was able to handle the situation well psychoiouically and was not seriously injured physically, at least. In short, given the special circumstances of the context, such a greeting at the beginning conveys a number of messages far beyond what a prototypical "Hello" can communicate. As the segments of the con\ ersations below demonstrate, the first greetings by the callers are all in the form of Hello along with or without addressing the recipient. After the Hello, the callers switch to Chinese to address the recipients. The use of Hello in this group of data presents an interesting pattern compared with the Chinese data collected in China and the English data pro\ ided by native speakers of English (1^12) OP A Hello --> C Hello A: Hi. Zheng Hua name C: 1-1 itj.;' ni hui lai la you back come SFP So you "re back (2#I2) OP A: Hello --> C Hello IM -te kang yue ma name Q) Is this Kang N'ue"* A: n'l ei Yes. 2 1 9 (3??6) OP A Hello --> C Hello li'l" ei Hi A: K ii'V' ei wanu vi 11 n ma hi name Q Hi. Is this \'ilin ' (6#6) OP A Hello --> C Hello A i;t !i( J-^ vvei \i hao le hello wash finish SFP Hi Are you done with dishes ' The data collected from nati\ e speakers of English suggests that the callers usually say Hi (but not Hello) in the caller s tlrst turn. That is due to the fact that Hello and Hi have different functions in telephone conversations While Hi is a greeting that can be used for both parties. Hello is proiotx pically used by recipients as an answer to summons of the call (or initial greeting). There are two exceptional conditions wherein Hello might be used by the callers: First, in cases wherein the caller has not heard the recipient's greeting clearly and in order to ensure that the phone is being answered, the caller might say Hello to repeat the summons. The second type of condition in w hich Hello is used by the callers is for calls between familiar or intimate relations as a playfial opening, which we have discussed earlier in the Enulish data 2 2 (t As has been discussed earlier, in Chinese, there is not an exact equivalent form of the English Hi for greeting in telephone conversations Whereas the English Hi can be used in both face-to-face encounters and entails no directionality (can be used by either the addressee or addresser), there is no such token in Chinese functioning the same as Hi in English does {']:(ii' is clo.se lo Hi in English but its register is limited, usually among acquaintances or for business contacts but not between family members, relatives, or in intimate relations, as confirmed by my participants As we have observed earlier in the CC data, the different forms of greeting in Chinese feature different social contextual constraints a standard greeting expression appropriate for all social contexts and all relations does not exist in Chinese It seems that addressing serves the function of greeting in many cases and is more pi\ oial for the beginning of interaction for Chinese conversationalists The percentage of greetinu by the callers in the C.\ corpus is only slightly higher (62%) than that of the comparable group for the CC data (53°o). and therefore not significant. But what is interesting is that greeting for the CA set of interactional data here suggests a clear departure of discourse pattern from both the CC and .A.A data. The greeting pattern differs from the CC data in that more than half of the callers greeted their recipients in English in the form of Hello. .After Hello, they switched to Chinese, starting with the addressing. The C.A data also re\ eal a significant difference from the .A.A data regarding greetinu. Whereas calls conducted by nativ e speakers of .American English show the predominate use of Hi as a greeting in the callers" first turn, it is Hello that is used more often in Chinese 2 2 I telephone calls made by nati\ e speakers of Chinese in the U S The use of Hello in calls such as the above takes the structural position of Hi in English, and it seems to be perceived as serving the same function as Hi in English telephone conversations Yet Hello is not used in the same manner by native speakers of English. (b) Identification The percentage of callers to identify themselves in I calls is low: it comprises thirteen percent of the total. It is lower than both the CC set (24°o) and the AA set (22°o) There are two factors that might have contributed to the relatively low percentage of caller self-identification in this group The first factor is the scope or size of the social circle of this group .As the participants in this group are living abroad and away from their relatives and friends back home, their social contact in the U.S. is relatively limited compared with either the CC group or the .AA group The relatively small size of the social circle is the first characteristic of the group which may have bearing on the dynamics of social interaction The second factor is the density of the social network between friends, which is actually related to the first The e.xperience of living abroad has accentuated the need for .support and help from friends, thus strengthening the contact and bondage between them, a phenomenon unique for this group Given that some of the participants are away from their relatives, home country, and perhaps studying and teaching at the same time, there is a tremendous amount of pressure on them. Such circumstances necessitates frequent communication, support, and help among friends in all aspects of life, be it academic, job related, living, or personal matters This naturally adds to the density of some of the 2 2 2 relations between friends In addition, the limited size of the social contact and circles ot friends further consolidates the strong tie between friends. In fact, a few of the calls are made to the same persons over a short period of time for most participants, suggests their familiarity with the persons called and the close contact they have kept. Such frequent contact is not observed in the CC set and is only rarely observed in the AA data The fact that some of the recipients are repeatedly called suggests that there is frequent contact between the two parties, which may account for the low percentage of caller self-identification for this group. It should also be mentioned thai the relation between the callers and the recipients in this CA group is ditTerent from the CC group interactional calls for the CA group are mostly between friends of similar age whereas calls in the CC group contain more age gaps between the two parties, and it is appropriate to identify oneself in those situations. (c) Phatic utterances Similar to the CC data, the phatic utterances evidenced in this group of calls almost all fit into four categories \oice recognition, caller's intrusion (see the explanation in CC set), previous contact or lack of contact, and addressee's state. There is only one phatic utterance that does not belong to these existing categories, and is therefore categorized as 'others." Although the categories are basically the same for both CC and C\ groups, the distribution of the different categories seem to differ In the CC data, there is more phatic talk on voice recognition Furthermore, for remarks regarding contact, it is always the lack of contact that is addressed, not previous contact. On the other hand, for the CA set, voice recognition is mentioned only once, whereas it is one of the most common phatic aspects 2 2 3 mentioned is previous contact Sucii variation is not random. It supports the observation made earlier (in the ID section) about the more focused and more frequent contact between the callers and the recipients in the CA set Since there are frequent I calls between the callers and the recipients, there is little need for callers to identifv themselves. Funhermore. phatic talk starting with callers" mentioning previous attempts to contact the recipients suggests that there has been frequent contact between the two parties By the same token, comments on voice recognition in the CC set indicate there has been lack of contact between the two parties for a certain period of time. In terms of content of the phatic utterances, it seems that characteristics of the phatic talk evidenced in the C.A set manifest themselves in a similar way with that in the CC data Typical routine expressions in Chinese for phatic talk similar to the English How are vou have not been observed in the Chinese data. The specific form phatic talk takes depends on the relationship, the status of the speakers \ is-a-vis each other, the frequency of the contact, and the time of the call For example, according to one of my participants who tends to ask the recipient to guess at her identity, such use is likely to occur if it is a call to a friend whom the caller has not contacted for a while Such a call is naturally somehow surprising, and the guessing is more fun. For calls between familiar friends with whoin the callers keep frequent contact, the phatic talk can involve very direct inquiries about the here-and-now activities the recipients are engaged in. For instance, | 'Where were you just now'^" j J |^' riLl (\[ T called you twice but you were not in.' I 1''^'' "What were you doing''" These are all comments and inquiries addressed to status equals or juniors in age. but not to senior relatives or friends senior in age. 2 2 4 On the other hand, ifoallinu at dinner time, an inquiry such as jH^'J "Have you had dinner yet'^' is likely to be used as a phatic opening. As to to what extent calling at meal times constitutes disturbance, the CA group provides a mixed picture. Some participants stated that they would avoid calling when recipients were dining. On the other hand, the data also shows that nian\ recipients did not mind being called when having meal There seems to be variation among both callers and recipients. Clearly, an inquiry about whether the recipient is sleeping at the time of the call is meant to be a check up on whether the call constitutes disturbance, in one call, when the caller found out that the recipient was sleeping due to her sickness, she immediately closed the conversation and let the recipient go back to sleep The sequence of openings in the twenty-two I calls made in the U S. is shown in Table 4.15, along w ith the percentage of calls w hich includes each element. 2 2 5 TABLE 4 15 CA: Interactional N =22 Opening Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetinu 95 Greetinu bv A 95 Greetinu bv C 62 Acknowiedumeni 76 Identification 57 Self ID bv A 0 Afllrniinu A's ID b\ C 57 Self ID bv C Phatic utterances 90 B. Statement of Purpose We have discussed the merge between phatic talk and the statement of purpose for 1 calls earlier in the CC set of data, and this is similar to the CA set. While a few of the calls do not ha\ e a distinctive statement of purpose after phatic talk, other calls feature a direct inquiry or a statement indicating the purpose. For example, in one call, the purpose of the call is conveyed through the inquir>' by the caller. ,1"; "So how was your visit back home '" In another call, the caller asked if the recipient was still suffering from her headache after her opening phatic utterance, h i j' " Is your headache gone''" In the call 4 -1, after the phatic opening regarding previous attempts of calling, the caller asked. f'j; ij|. 'J:;; 'Hey. how did it happen*]*' In one call, the caller explicitly stated, r<'Jl . I'Z'j'l: ]' 'Nothing special. Just to chat. I just had dinner.' In another call, the recipient was cooking dinner while the call came and the recipient asked. "What's up']''The caller then responded. 'Ji. "Nothing, just to chat " In summarv. it is typical that participants move onto the purpose of calls after some phatic exchanges. Determined by the nature of the calls, which is to exchange information on each other's well-being and on other topics of common interest, the rhythm for these calls is unhurried since time is usually not a great concern. C. Closing (a) Pre-Closing In forty-percent of the calls, there is the initial attempt to close the talk which is not successfully carried out due to the introduction of new topics such as family, grocery shopping, or visits to each other Following the discussion of these topics, there is clearly renewed initiation of closing in each case and therefore, the occurrence of pre-closing in these calls is verified (b) Initiation ot'closirm The linguistic forms used to initiate closing evidence similarity with the data of the CC set. f'f "So much for now" is the most common expression to close the talk. The caller's technique (ScheglofftK; Sacks. 1973) which makes reference to the interest of the other party includes comments such as 'ii;-j' "Why don't you go ahead and have dinner ' ffvH,|l[^ "Hope you get some good rest." 'J|j f'j^Vvtl}i|El'(lI "I'll let you go to bed " Comments made in reference to the caller's interest by the called party is not evidenced in the corpus Houe\er. there are overt announcements made by the callers of the need to terminate the call due to circumstantial reasons. For example, fll j" "The cake is burning." j' T need to go and pick up my daughter.' fj'A i "Somebody is knocking on our door" Recipients-initiated closings include the following: "I'll call vou back later. OK'^" (which is used between very familiar friends) and r "I'm sorry I have to go." It seems that the more familiar, the more open and direct the two parties can be with each other regarding whether it is a good time to call or a good lime to con\ erse. There is. however, some difl'erences between the interactional calls in the CC set and the CA set. For the C.A set. there are three calls in which the closings are initiated by the recipients One of those is initiated by the mother of the caller in China but the other two are by friends. The reasons for terminating the talks are obvious: the recipients had other activities to attend to at the moment In one case, the recipient needed to go to work and therefore, she had to terminate the talk In another case, the recipient had to put her 2 2 8 daughter to bed since she was exhausted and already dozing otT. in addition, this is a call between friends who are \ erv close and they can be very direct with each other For the CC set, there are three 1 calls with recipients initiating closings, too. Nevertheless, the initiators for the three calls for CC set are either mom. or aunts, but the calls are not between friends (c) Phatic utterances For closings of 1 calls, the percentage of phatic utterances for the CA set (95° o) is considerably higher than that in the CC set (7 l^o). The four categories of phatic aspects based on the CC data still hold for this group. Eighty-five percent of the calls with phatic closings address future contact, the most common element for phatic talk in closing Thanking and good wishes occur in thirty percent of the phatic closings respectively. Regards to family is rare, occurring only once out of the total twenty closings considered valid for this research Some detailed discussion regarding thanking is necessar\' here. .-Mthough thanking occurs in close to one-third (.^^Co) of the calls, it does not manifest the same function as it does in the T calls While thanking constitutes the initiation of closing in T calls, this is not the case with I calls. The following examples proN'ide us with illustrations for the different function of thanking in 1 calls (4#1) ic c- ij|; iit ,ii Kr I'l.!! na jiu zhe >ang ba than just this way SFP So much for now then iijj k li-j i'L| f'j- wo ming tian zou shi lai jiao ni I tomorrow walk time come call you 2 2 9 1 11 call you when I leave tomorrow A III fj'J hao de good OK m f'j: J' \ie xie ni le thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot c 'y:- i'W bu yao xie not want thank You are welcome LT Iij. 1: zai hui again meet Bye 'i{. hao xie xie OK thank thank OK, thank \ou Hi zai hui again meet Bye In this case, closing was initiated by the caller with her "So much for now." In response to that, the recipient thanked the caller. Although it was not stated explicitly what A thanked C for. within the given context, both parties clearly understood Actually in Chinese, expression of gratitude is typically achieved with a general [(jjidl "Thank you" without making it explicit in words what one is thanking the other(s) for. We will look at one more example of the use ofthankin (5#17) A: A: m m i'i- xie xie ni thankthank VOLI Thank you C, k\- ll'i'' hao nia good 0 OK'^ A: llf. hao good OK IC C .iA ir jiu zhe yang just this way So much for no\'. A kf. hao good OK '/m f'j:. xie xie ni thankthank you Thank you LT C: //llf W, m. I']' zaijian a zai jian again see SFP again see Bve-bve Bve-bve 2 3 1 A: ff •']> you konu jiu iai a have time just come SFP Visit us when you ha\ e time. c =11^-, {j-'v: Iff w ei you kong zai liao yes have time again chat Yes, I'll talk to \ou soon A: hao hao good good OK. C '7|i|- zai jian again see Bye In this example, we can see that the recipients thanked the caller twice during this segment of the closing It might be argued that the tlrst 'Thank you' functions as initiation of closing. Howe\er. gi\en that the recipient repeated 'Thank you' after the caller's 'So much for now," v\hich is the protot\pical initiation of closing, such an analysis is difficult to hold. It seems to be more reasonable and logical to perceive the 'Thank you' as part of the phatic talk during closing when the recipient was trying to express her appreciation for the call That is why she thanked the caller again even after the initiation of closing. I will come back to this example when I discuss leave-taking. (d) Leave-taking For the distribution of lea\c-taking initiation, as TABLE 4 16 at the end of this section indicates, the percentage is still di\ ided among the three categories, similar to the 2 J 2 CC set. Nevertheless, the distribution shows a higher proportion for recipient-initiated leave-taking there is an equal split of forty-five percent between caller and recipient- initiation, while recipient-initiated leave-taking in the CC set only amounts to thirty-five percent. The most salient feature ot" leave-taking for this group of data is code-switching. Leave-taking is accomplished Ibny-seven percent of the time in Chinese and forty-seven percent of the time in English, uith six percent being a mix of codes between English and Chinese for leave-taking if we look at individual discourse patterns, three of the bilinguals code-switch to English leave-taking almost all the time whereas two of the three participants never code-switch for leave-taking. The other participant shows a mixed pattern of both code-su itching and non-switching. What is interesting is that the English proficiency of these three participants who almost always code-switch to English leave- taking is much higher than the other three participants in the study (1 1 ->) C ki. 41^ ff] I'f ')<• hao wo dao shi hou wo uo men zai peng tou OK I PP time I I PL again meet OK. I, we'll meet then A: OK//fj- Ok xing OK OK^ C: //kf kf. IJi; .ii f^. hao hao na jiu zhe yang OK OK then just this way OK, all right So much for now A OK. —> LT C '/Bye-bye 2 3 3 ~> A: //Bye In this call 1#I3. the recipient mixed OK with U' "OK" in her previous utterance, but the caller did not manifest other code-switching discourse behavior except when she did the leave-takinu. (2#12) C ki (\'l -fic (l -i:. fiJ (]• 1']^ U ^ hao de wo you kong wo men you kong zai lian xi OK PT I ha\ c time 1 PL have time again contact OK. when 1. when we ha\ e time, we'll talk again. A: llf hao good OK C: llf hao good OK ~> LT Bye-bye —> A Bye For this call, there is no code-sv^ itching prior to leave-taking; discourse is completel\' in Chinese But when the conversation progresses to leave-taking. C just switches to English and the recipient does the same In the next example, similar switching occurs. (3#2) IC C. iJi: f/j; vi liili na ni jiu shui ba then you just sleep SFP ril let you go to bed A: IM. en Uh hum 2 J 4 c i"i -k I'l- I'll hui tou zai sliuo back head again speak We'll talk next time -> A Bye-bye —> C Bye Let us take a look at the one call in which there is mix between Chinese and English leave-taking. (5i?6) c. ki ii'i'' hao ma li \ia good 0 name OK, XX^ gao yao jiao le cake will burn ASP The cake will be burnt A F(NX) LL\ hao good OK C //ifii'V' hao ma good Q OK-^ LT A: 'Bye --> c: 11 J- iji m- zai jian a again see SFP Bye-bye 2 3 5 In this case, while A switched to Bye in English, C did the leave-taking in Chinese in spite of A s English expression, producing an interesting and unique mixed code duet for leave-taking. The sequence of closings in the twenty-two Chinese interactional calls made in the U.S. is show n in Table 4 16, along w ith the percentage of calls which includes each element TABLE 4 16 CA: Interactional N = 22 Closinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing 40 Initiation of closing 100 Initiation by A Initiation by C 85 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 95 Leave-taking 100 Initiation by A 45 Initiation by C 45 Simultaneous initiation 10 2 3 6 4.3, 3 liiteractional-Transactioiial Calls All together there are twentv-six calls for this categorv, all of which are made to friends residing in the L S A. Opening (a) Greeting Except for three calls that miss the ver\' first turn from the recipients, all twenty-three calls staa with recipients" "Hello"", including the second openings. For greetings from the callers, the C.A. set shows a much higher percentage (92%) compared with the CC set (52"o). It is also noticeable that greeting takes a number of different forms either in Chinese or in English. There is "Hi" (15°o). "Hello" (38%), H.'X 'Yes/Hi' (42*'o), and ifl' Hex" (5°o) .After this brief greeting, forty-six percent of the calls also feature the exchange of "Hi" (initiated by either party), showing a proximate percentage to that in 1-T calls for ihe CC set (43%). (The use of in the CC set has been discussed in detail in the section 4.1 3 ) (b) Identitlcation Caller identification occurs almost one-fifth of the time (l9°o), including two cases in which the callers state respectiveK "It"s me" or "Still me" (a follow-up call) rather than identifying themselves by name Compared with the 29° o ofCC I-T calls, the 19°b total seems to be lower However, the percentage difference may be partly accounted for by the three follow-up calls which constitute 14°o of the total percentage of calls. In other words. 2 3 7 had there not been the three tbilow-up calls, the percentage of caller ID for the CA group might be higlier .Another contributing factor might be the density of the social relation discussed in the sections on I calls for the C A set, reducing the need for explicit caller self- identification (c) Phatic utterances More than half (54°o) of the calls contain phatic utterances. The categories that are identified in the CC set are e\ ident in the CA set as well There are also phatic talks about previous unsuccessful attempts by the caller to contact the recipients: for example, J' -}'!; j' "I found you at last ' Phatic comments regarding previous unsuccessful contact prior to the discussion of the main purpose constitute more than one-fourth (28° b) of the phatic utterances for the whole group. The sequence of openings in the l-T calls is shown in Table 4 17, along w ith the percentage of calls which includes cach element. 2 3 « TABLE 4 17 CA : Interactional-Transactiona! \ =26 Openinu Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetinu 100 Greetinu bv A 100 Greetinu bv C 02 Acknovvledument 58 Identification 65 Self ID bv A 0 Affirminu A's ID bv C 58 Self ID bvC 19 Phatic utterances 54 B. Statement of Purpose The purposes of calls var\ These include to obtain or share some information, to arrange for a time to do groceiy shopping or to meet, to discuss a trip together, or to ask for some help. Three features regarding statement of purpose are observed in the I-T calls from the CC set The first one is discourse markers Not all the discourse markers evidenced in the CC set are displayed in the CA set In this subset of the corpus, -Jii+iU'iiKrnDf'j; or 2 3 9 |iij/f- 'I wanted to ask sou" is the most common way of presenting a request for information to friends, occurrinu in more than one-third of the calls. Other expressions indicating presentation of the purpose include li'Ji l i^J. "Just want to tell you" and IJ|j i" "tha t" Here, the discourse marker iJlj that" with prolonged stretch deserves some explanation Literally speaking, it means "that". However, in oral discourse and consequently in telephone conversation. )J|j "tha t" is a hesitation marker, and signals that the speaker is tr>inu to recall or state what he/she has planned to say and presumably that is the purpose of calling It usually precedes the main topic and serves, therefore, as an antecedent of the purpose of calls in telephone conversations. The use of direct inquir\ as a statement of purpose is the second feature of the CC set. This is also evidenced in the CA data. For example. f'j:|'|'j 15 fj"^ "Did you find all the materials you need"^" J'M- I^J /I. ,iiiX;ii "Have you decided on whether you are going Frida\ Similar to the CC set, direct inquiries for stating purposes of calls are used only in calls that in\ o!\ e no impositions. The third feature is the mentioning of the topic or the narration of the event that is related to the purpose of calling Such examples include >t<; j'. 'jTjK'){" j' "I'm back. I went to get the pictures " Although the caller did not say why she was calling, the recipient immediately understood the purpose of the call; the caller wanted to inform the recipient that the pictures the\ took together on a trip were ready. 2 4 0 In a few cases, there are also direct statements without any of the features discussed above. When callers presented tlie purpose of calls, they simply stated the reasons without discourse markers, nor is there a general topic introduced first. In those cases, either there have been previous discussions on the topic or the caller seem to be in a rush. That is why there is repeated overlap betueen the t\so parties in the conversation even at the beginning. (Isl) OP A: (missing) c 1']^. :/[c il)t iW ai zhang xiao yun a hi SN name Q Hi. Is this Xiaoyun ' A: ii'i;, // ai zheng liua yes SN name Yes, "Hua c ):i: wo zheng hua I SN name . This is Hua A. Ml'^i ai //Hi ->SP c 7/ii;[. ;!<: J' m. ai wo wo zhang fu lai le o hi I I husband come ASP SFP Hi. my. my husband is coming, 0K'!> A. kf. M {I- H hao xian zai guo lai shi ma OK nou o\er come be Q OK. So he is cominu now. riuht'^ 2 4 I In this call, the caller intbrmed the recipient that her husband would drop oft' some books at the recipient s house Apparently, there had been some previous contact between the caller and the recipient and this call was just to confirm the arrangement C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu The occurrence of pre-closinu in 1-T calls is rare (12° o). This seems to suggest that the closing is achieved in a manner that is linear in most cases. (b) Initiation of closinu For closing. (IJ|') (:2s)!i'vtiA f'l ( i > "So much for now" is the most typical form initiating the closure of the talk, accounting t"or more than one third (38°o) of the linguistic tokens for initiation of closinu Semantically. it conveys the speaker's assessment of the adequacy of the interaction. A majorit\' of the closing of calls are initiated by callers (lb°o) with only 20% initiated by the recipients The low percentage of recipient-initiated closing is consistent with the pattern ob.ser\ ed in the CC set (27° o), and it is also similar to the percentage of the .A.A set (27",)) Let us take a more detailed look and examine the circumstances in which recipients initiate closings. We have discussed the use of thanking and its different functions in different types of telephone calls previously, and in this set of calls, thanking serves as the token for initiation of closing in a few cases, but is used for phatic talk in most calls We w ill illustrate with specific examples below (l?^14) c kf fiy III fi'j. 2 4 2 o hao de hao de OK good PT good PT OK. all right all right -> iC m m \ie xie o thankthank SFP Thanks a lot A: m 4/ |'| C kf. hao good All right Bye-bye A Bye. In the call above (1^14). the caller was calling her friend who happened not to be home, and therefore the caller talked to her roommate instead. For such a call, it seems that thanking the recipient is the t\ pical way to initiate the closing Another similar example is 3# 10. (3#I0) c iiw 5tk i"i ii. lak l/li ru guo ta hui lai rang ta gen wo if she come back let her PP me If she comes back, could you tell her to IT t 111 i.f;- 'li iir da ge dian hua hao bu hao make CL telephone good not good give me a call'^ A: hao lei 2 4 3 uood SFP Sure. C: llf hao good OK IC m. xie xie thank thank Thank you LT A Bye C Bye. A Bye This is a call between two femaies who are not acquainted After asking the recipient to pass on the message to the intended recipient, the caller thanked the recipient and it naturally served as the initiation of closing Such use and function of thanking is also found in two more calls betueen friends, for example in the call 6# 12 below, but the occurrence of thanking functioning as the initiation of closings for calls between friends is less common. (6#I2) A fr. xing OK C: kf hao good OK IC iWifjj. xie xie thank thank 2 4 4 Thank you LT A; zai jian again meet Bye. C: OK The call 6^12 in which thankinu is used as the initiation of closing is special, given the circumstances This is the third time in a row the caller made a call to the same recipient. The first follow-up call was to ask some other information the caller had intended but forgotten to ask. However, the second call did not end naturally; the receiver was dropped by the recipient and the call was terminated unintentionally. Therefore, the caller called the recipient a third time (6P12) to finish the talk. In this case (the third call), it is understandable that the ending was brief because they had done an elaborate leave-taking minutes ago. wishing each other well and promising future contact. There is only one call in which thanking is used between friends for closing the call under unmarked situations Gi\cn that only fifteen percent of the initiation of closing in this I-T group is achie\ed through ilianking (compared with the lOCo for T calls), and that two calls out of the four (in which thanking is used as initiation of closing for the I-T group) is between persons unacquainted, thanking presents itself as having different fijnctions in different types of telephone conversations With regard to the initiator of closing, most are conducted by callers with one-fifth (20%) initiated by recipients, and this is consistent with the CC set and AA set. 2 4 5 (c) Phatic utterances The percentage of phatic talk for closing occurs in less than half (48%) of the calls, showing a lower number than both CC (64%) and .\A (75%) sets The lower rate might be partly due to the three follow-up calls (as explained earlier) In this group, the most common phatic talk for closing consists of fliture contact, with the next being thanking as discussed in the previous section W'ishing-well remarks occurs in two calls, but the categon,- for regards to family is absent, which might be partly due to the frequent contact and visits between the callers and recipients. In addition to tlinctioning as the initiation of closing for the I 5° o of calls in this group, thanking also occurs in close to one-tlrth (19 °o) of the I-T calls as part of the phatic components This is illustrated in 1 "• 1 (Isl) IC C ///)J|: ^ fi na me jiu zhe \ ang tben just this way So much for now then A OK C: (If. hao good OK. LT C /Bye-bye -> A: f^j; i'-f< xie xie ni o thankthank you SFP //Thanks a lot. c lif. m iW f'j; hao xie xie ni o 2 4 6 OK thankthank you SFP OK. thanks a lot C Bye-bye A: kf. Bye-bye In this closing, we can see that the recipient's thanking follows the initiation of closing and does not function as the initiation of closing. Rather, it constitutes the content of the phatic talk for closing and both parties thank each other. Example fijrther illustrates the function of thanking as phatic talk in closing for I-T calls (6si8) IC C: n i-a i)l: m i: J' wo gai \i wan qu le 1 should wash bow 1 go SFP 1 need to go and do tlie dishes. A. f HZ cai chi wan fan just eat finish meal \'ou just finished eating' C: ai >es A: (ij-. hao good OK C (If. hao good OK. ~> nm iW W xie xie a thank thank SFP Thanks a lot 2 4 7 A: !!%. f 'C na bu ke qi then not mention Then, don't mention it. C OK LT A Bye-bye C Bye. Again, in this call, thanking is u.sed not to initiate closing but to express the caller's appreciation for the recipient s help The initiation of closing is clearly achieved by caller's overt announcement that she needs to go and do the dishes. (d) Leave-taking Code-switching for leave-iakinu still manifests itself in the same pattern as it does in the CA set of I calls. More then two-thirds (68° o) of the calls feature the entire leave- taking exchange in English. In otlier words, both parties conduct lea\e-taking in English although their previous conversation is in Chinese (in some cases code-switching starts with the last OK or All right prior to leave-taking). Sixteen percent of the leave-taking is a mix of both Chinese and English, four percent in Spanish (a recipient is learning Spanish), and only twelve percent of the lea\e-taking is conducted in Chinese without code- switching 1 w ill shov\ examples of each categor\- below. (3#9) IC C; jjc jiu zhe yang just this way So much for novs then —> LT C //Bye-bye 2 4 8 ~> A: /Bye-bye (2#3) ic C: kf. iiit iA tr i' hao jiu zhe > ang le a good just this uay ASP SFP OK. so much for nou then A: IM, en Uh hum C OK A: f J' xing OK^ ~> LT C 'Bye-bye ~> A: /Bye In the call 3#9. there is no English used prior to leave-taking v\hereas in the call 2ff3, OK has occurred even before lca\ e-taking. In either case, leave-taking is completely accomplished through English and both parties conduct the Iea\e-taking in English almost at the same time. It shows that doing leave-taking in English is already part of the routine for the speakers and it is not prompted or atTected by the other party Now I will examine leave-taking in Chinese (5#5): (5#5) IC C: iJi: ijit jjc fr na jiu zhe yang then just this wa\ So much for nou A: kf= hao uood 2 4 9 OK c •=m \ri \ lift zuo fan le o make meal ASP SFP I need to cook. OK'^ A i(l-t iW f^j: m \ie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot C: 'i'x X; mei yuan xi no connection Don't mention it A: m iW- xie xie thank thank Thanks. c lii: r. Hi IAL "PI —> na ge zai jian a that again see SFP Uh:: Bye A: |l]" ijiL /'llf- IAL it- zai jian zai jian ji ping agian see again see name Bye-bye. XX C: '/|l]. 1^. zai jian again see Bye. This leas e-taking exchange shares features with leave-taking evidenced in the CC set of data in that leave-taking does not constitute one exchange; it shows a tripartite structure, with the initiator starting leave-taking with a sentence-tlnal-particle (SFP) at the 2 5 0 end of the utterance, anticipating reply and confirmation. After the response from the interlocutor, the initiator closes the leave-taking sequence. Out of the three Chinese leave- taking closings, two feature sequences vv ith more than two turns rather than the two-turn (adjacent pair) leave-taking typical of the English pattern The example below (6= 1) illustrates the point (based on the CC set) that the CC and CA leave-taking sequence does not take exactly the same position nor does it fijnction quite the same way as it does in English (6#1) ~> LT A: llf. If], 1^^ hao zai jian o good again see SFP OK. bve-bve -> C ki. M hao xie \ie ni o good thank thank \ou SFP OK. thanks a lot A: (Ij. hi iM- W hao yi hou zai liao good later again chat OK Talk to you later C; hao good OK A: k{ kf. |lj. i;i. hao hao zai jian good good again see OK Bye-bye c lif. IaL. zai jian again see Bve-bve 2 5 1 What can be obsened here is that the leave-takinu sequence in Chinese conversations does not occur only in terminal positions, it seals the call In the above case, as in many other calls in the CC set. thankinu and reference to future contact (or other phatic talk) occur after the occurrence of the tlrst leave-takinj^. Moreover, there is repetition of leave- taking, more often from the person who initiates leave-taking. In addition to the Chinese and English leave-taking respectively, we have also observed mixed-code leave-taking as in An2 and b43 (4fi2) IC C i'Hi xie xie thank thank Thank you A kf nWj- hao lei good SFP All right ~> LT C 111 lAl. zai jian again see Bye A: Bye-bye (6#3) LT A: )i|I |l[. IAL Ifj na zai jian a then again see SFP Bye-bye c; /if // m Kif hao xie xie o good thankthank SFP OK //Thanks a lot 2 5 2 -> A: // 11]- l£ iq'< zai jian o again see SFP Bye-bye -> C OK Bye In both cases, one party does the leave-taking in Chinese whereas the other party switches to English In 4=;2. it is the recipient who switches. In 6fr3. it is the caller. As for initiation of leave-taking, the percentage of 40 " o by the recipients is not substantially different from any otlier groups The sequence of openings in the I-T calls is shown in Table 4,18, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 5 3 TABLE 4 18 CA. Interactional-Transactional N - 26 Closinu Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing 12 Initiation of closing 96 Initiation by A 22 Initiation by C 78 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 48 Leave-taking 100 Initiation by A 40 Initiation by C 36 Simultaneous initiation 24 4.4. Telephone Conversations in English by Native Speakers of Chinese Telephone calls in English made by nati\ e speakers of Chinese consist of calls made to businesses, university offices, friends, acquaintances, and unacquainted persons who are native speakers of American English ( and in two cases to native speakers of other 2 5 4 languages). There are forty calls recorded, twenty-four T calls, six I calls and ten I-T calls The discussion will follow the same three categories as in other sets of data 4.4.1 Transactional Calls There are twenty-four T calls in English made by native speakers of Chinese The distribution of calls among six participants is not even: while one participant made the most number of calls, one did not make any calls of this type. There are two primary reasons for the few number of T calls for some participants; first, there is trepidation on the part of the participants in making calls in English, especially those whose English is less tluent, for fear of making mistakes and causing miscommunication. Secondly, for these participants, most T calls are usually taken care of by their husbands and there is rarely the need for them to make T calls in English by themselves. However, this is not the case with those Chinese bilinguals who are fluent in both spoken and written English. A. Opening (a) Greeting Most of the recipients answering telephones for businesses greet the callers in addition to providing self-identification of the place reached. Calls made to university departments or labs do not feature the same kind of initial responses as businesses. As we have discussed in the .A,A set earlier, calls answered by departments, offices or labs on university campuses usually identify themselves but not along with greetings in most cases For callers, there is greeting in fifty-four percent of the calls What is worth notice is that callers" greetings take different forms: expressions used include Hello. Hi, Excuse me. and Yes, with most of the greetings in the form of Hello The use of Hello by the callers as a greeting shows a clear departure from the AA data in that callers" greeting in the AA data is predominantly in the form of Hi. For example, in 3# 15. we have Hello from the caller in her first turn of the talk. (3#15) OP 1 A; (recorded message) Thank you for calling West Airline. . 0P2A; West Airline. Cindy speaking. How may I help you'^ --> C; Hello. (b) Identification All the recipients answering calls for businesses or institutions consistently identify- themselves at the beginning of the call, constituting an overwhelming majority (92°o) of the transactional calls. The only two exceptions are two calls directed to residence. These two calls belong to the transactional categorv- because of the nature of the calls. While the first one is to obtain renting information, the other is to inform the landlady of the caller's upcoming moving out. Caller identification takes place in twenty-tlve percent of the calls Within the group, one participant demonstrates a much higher rate of self-identification than the others It should also be mentioned that the calls conducted by this caller are directed to specific persons regarding specific matters and self-identification is necessary in those calls. Most of the other calls are to obtain information only. (c) Phatic utterances There is only one call in which the phatic inquiry "How are you doing" is present and the caller is acquainted with the recipient. None of the other calls contain phatic 2 5 6 expressions at all This pattern is consistent with what is observed in transactional calls for the CC, AA, and CA data sets. The sequence of openings in the twenty-two transactional calls is shown in TABLE 4.19, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. TABLE 4. 19 CAE: Transactional N =24 Opening Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greeting 100 Greeting by A 63 Greeting bv C 34 Acknowledgment 0 Identification 96 Self ID bv A 92 •Aifirminu A's ID bv C 8 Self ID by C 23 Phatic utterances 4 2 5 7 B. Statement of Purpose Purposes are stated mostly in the callers" first turn. For example, "I need to rent a car " "I just need to confirm a reservation 1 made days ago " "i just want to know when the offices close today " "Td like to know your fare for a round trip " These requests are clear, straightforw ard, and effectively communicating the purposes of the calls. There is one call that caused some initial difficulties for the recipient in understanding the purpose of the call due to the caller's lack of fluency in English In this case, the caller was trying to find out the business hours of the pizza store and she said, "I just ask. what time open." At first, the recipient thought the caller wanted to find out when the pizza was done. After the caller repeated her question a third time, the recipient understood the question and provided the information the caller requested. There are still some differences in the choice of expressions used in this group by native speakers of Chinese from the language used in the AA set by native speakers of American English. Specifically, three types of structures that occur most often in the A.A set of data are not observed in the CAE set of data: first, "I was wondering. "" "I was calling to or "I'm trying to find out. ", second, the use of past tense as a softening device (suggested by one of my participants when inquired about the function of such use of past tense) as in "I vvantM to ask you a question" or "It's just that I needed to make an appointment. . third, direct questions such as "Can you tell me when Dr Stevenson is going to be in there'^" In addition, there are also some expressions that are observed in the C.AE data but not in the AA^ set. For example, in the CAE set, we have the extremely polite inquiry in the 2 5 8 form of "Would you please give me some information about Both the words would and please are choices that are not observed in any T calls made by native speakers of American English, A similar inquiry we have observed in the AA set is realized in forms such as "Can you (Could you) tell me " or "Do you know " It seems that native speakers of Chinese do not have the same linguistic and rhetorical repertoire as native speakers of English when making requests for business phone calls in forms that are neither bald-on-record nor over-polite. Granted, the number of T calls in the CAE set is significantly smaller than in the AA set. Therefore, we might reasonably infer that had there been more telephone calls in the CAE set, more varieties of linguistic forms might have emerged, and the type of structures mentioned above might have been observed. Nevertheless, interviews with the panicipants has confirmed that this may not be the case with all the absent forms. As a matter of fact, none of the participants are aware of the use and flinction of the past tense as in I wanted to... or 1 needed to Therefore, the use of verbs in statements of purpose by Chinese participants only takes the form of 1 need to., or 1 want to . . Compared with the 1 needed to or I wanted to produced by native speakers of American English, the present tense of the verb form I need to or 1 want to seems to be less polished, more forcefijl and demanding, with no hedging or softening devices attached. 2 5 9 C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu The very first attempt to terminate the calls are all effective in that no pre-closing is observed in any of the T calls for the CAE group. (b) Initiation of closinu Initiation of closing takes various forms of Thank you for the predominant number of calls. Compared with the CC set of transactional calls, it is a salient feature that fifty percent of the caller- initiated Thank yous are responded to with a Thank you (or Thanks) for calling . . . or Thank you by the recipients in return. For example. (3#15) C OK, I see IC Thank you ver\' much. —> A: Thank you for calling West Airlines. LT Bye now C Bye. It needs to be made clear that these return Thank-yous (which are in reply to customers" thanking) are not considered phatic content. The rational for such exclusion is that for many businesses, "Thank you (for calling .)"" ser\ es a similar function to "You are welcome." Whereas the latter is a routine reply to thanking applicable in any contexts, the former is a fairly standard verbal reply for businesses in closing telephone calls with customers. Such being the case, it is reasonable not to categorize replies such as "Thank you for calling . " as belonging to phatic utterances. There is one exception in which initiation of closing is achieved in forms other than Thank you In this case, the caller expressed her readiness to close the call with "I'll see 2 6 a you tomorrow " This is the same call mentioned previously with phatic inquiry at the beginning. In this call, at the end of the conversation, the caller decided to go to the recipient's office the next day to pick up some material for her class Closings for most of the calls are initiated by callers. Only thirteen percent of the calls feature recipient-initiated closings. (c) Phatic utterances Phatic expressions are observ ed in thirteen percent of the calls in this group. Since the presence of phatic utterance in T calls is rare in other comparable sets of data, some explanation about the content and contexts for phatic utterances in this group as well as justification for such coding and categorization are necessary In addition to the thanking which functions as the initiation of closing, there are two calls in which the callers repeat their thanks. (3#16) --> IC C Thank you very much for your information. A Thank you for calling Pacific .Airline. --> C Thank you LT C //Bye. A ,//Bve-bve (5^11) --> IC C: Thank you: A; OK. Thank vou= C =for information for me .A. 0K= --> C =Thank vou. A OK. LT C Bye-bye A Bve 2 6 1 In both of these cases, the callers thank the recipient twice, the first utterance functioning as the initiation of closing. The second Thank you, however, not fianctioning as the initiation of closing either in terms of structure or meaning, seems to emphasize the callers' appreciation of the help they have received, and thus is considered to be phatic content in these two calls. There is one more call (also discussed above) that is perceived to contain phatic utterances for closing due to the reference to the future contact (the meeting next day) in addition to the Thank you which is identified as initiation of closing. (2#16) C OK, I see It's great. IC Thank you very much, —> So, ril no to see vou tomorrow morninu. A OK LT C Bye-bye A Bve The purpose of this call is to find out what type of paper work needs to be completed for the caller with regard to her work in the summer After discussing it with the recipient over the phone, the caller is informed that she would need to go to the recipient's ofTice the next morning to get the contract signed. That is the reason for her to visit A's office and her reference to meeting the recipient the next morning. (d) Leave-takinu Ninety-two percent of the calls clearly feature leave-taking. There seems to be two different reasons for the only two calls without leave-taking. One is a transfer call and therefore the recipient put the caller through to another e.xtension. The other call is 3#7 (3#7) A: Um she's not here. 2 6 2 May I take a message'^ C: Oh no IC Thank you A: You're welcome. C: No problem. The last utterance "No problem" seems to be the caller's slip of tongue. With this expression, it might be unusual to foilou up with leave-taking expressions anyway Looking at the length of leave-taking sequences, eighty-two percent of the calls end with two-turn leave-taking sequences while eighteen percent have one-turn leave-taking sequences. With regard to initiation, callers take the initiative tbrty-six percent of the time, recipients eighteen percent, and there is thirty-six percent simultaneous leave-taking initiation. The sequence of closings in the twenty-two transactional calls is shown below in Table 4.20, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 6 3 TABLE 4. 20 CAE: Transactional N = 24 Closing Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing 0 Initiation of closing 100 Initiation by A 13 Initiation by C 87 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 13 Leave-taking 92 Initiation by A 18 Initiation by C 46 Simultaneous initiation 36 4.4.2 Interactional Calls Interactional calls in English conducted by native speakers of Chinese constitute the smallest number of calls for any category in the corpus: there are only six calls all together While three calls are made to fellow workers, one is to a fellow student, one to a former hostess, and one to a former landlady. 2 6 4 A. Opening (a) Greetina Four out of the six calls start with the usual Hello from the persons who answer the call. For the other two calls, one recording misses the first turn by the recipient. The other phone call starts with self-identification by the recipient instead of the typical Hello That is because the call is made to the store where the recipient is at work although the call is intended to be an interactional call. For greeting from the callers, there is both Hi and Hello used, as illustrated in and )#20. (5f^9) OP A Hello -> C Hello A Hi. C Hey Can I talk to Heidi'^ A This is her (3#20) OP A Hello. C Oh, may I speak to Cathy'' A This is Cathy. --> C Hi, Cathv In terms of percentage, greeting by C occurs in eighty-three percent of the calls. This is close to the eighty-nine percent of the AA/I calls. On the other hand, the percentage for the CC/I set is only fifty-three percent and sixty-two percent for the C.A/I set. (b) Identification For calls made to residence, self-identification of the recipients is usually not provided as has been evidenced in other sets of data. Since one call in this group is made to a store 2 6 5 where the recipient is at work, there is one call in this group that features recipient self- identification at the beginning whereas the rest of the calls start with recipients' Hello Caller self-identification shows a high increase compared with other interactional calls for comparable groups For this group, there are two-thirds of calls (66° o) in which the callers identify themselves at the beginning, not counting in one call in which the caller first asks the recipient to guess at her identity and later identifies herself (CC/I is 2 l^o whereas AA/I shows 22°-o). Two characteristics concerning caller identification seem to emerge: the first characteristic suggests that on the one hand, the callers seem to be aware of the need to identify themselves for calls in English (which has resulted in the high percentage of caller self-identification): on the other hand, caller self-identification may not occur in exactly the same order as the sequence followed by native speakers of American English. The two examples below will illustrate the point. (5#2) 0P2 A: Service deli May I help you'^ C Uh how are vou. Susan'^ A Hi. ~> C Fni Jiping. A What are you doing'' C Uh I just ask you, how are you today'' As we can see, this is a call that is directed to a store. What is salient is the order in which caller-identification takes place. In this case, the caller only identified herself after her phatic inquiry How are you, which is a departure from the routine structure of sequences for telephone openings in English. It is quite obvious that the recipient did not 2 6 6 feel comfortable responding to the inquiry before she knew who the caller was and consequently, she replied Hi. It is at this point of not receiving an anticipated answer that the caller proceeded with self-identification. It is possible that the caller would have dispensed with the self-identification all together had the recipient given a direct reply to her How are you inquirv. but what is interesting is that in the opening, a phatic inquiry- precedes self-identification. It is possible that the caller is following the Chinese discourse pattern in that for certain relations such as good friends, it is acceptable for one to start conversing without identify ing oneself and let the recipient work out the caller"s identity through the brief exchanges in the course of conversation, thus the preference of voice recognition outweighing the need for self-identification. The following example shows a similar pattern. (5ff4) OP A Hello C Hi. Susan. A Yes C Are you sick'^ A Yes C I'm Jiping Similar to the call 5??2 above, the caller only identifies herself after the initial inquiry It is probably uncomfortable for native speakers of American English to experience a telephone conversation opening in such sequence. But there are special circumstances we need to be aware of that might have triggered the occurrence of the sequence as evidenced in these two calls. For both of the two calls above, the recipient (the same) was sick and perhaps that prompts the caller to open the conversation with phatic inquiry first as she was genuinely concerned with the recipient's well-being. More importantly, perhaps, the 2 (y 7 caller's pragmatic competence in Chinese outweighs her pragmatic competence in English in this respect. As mentioned earlier, for female native speakers of Chinese, when making interactional calls between friends, self-identification at the outset of the conversation seems to be less common and can be unnatural in some cases because self-identification leaves no opportunity for the phatic interaction which can be an important part of the opening for Chinese interlocutors. It is therefore acceptable to start the conversation with phatic inquiries rather than direct self-identification. It should be noted that this is not the only sequence in which this caiier proceeds with self-identification in calls made in English. There is also a call in which the same caller follows the sequence of a typical English call with self-identification first and then the phatic inquiry A possible explanation for this variability will be explored, but before we move flirther on in our discussion of second language learners" discourse behavior, a brief note about findings in the .\A set of data would be helpful Phatic inquiries in the AA set of data, regardless of the type of calls, almost alw ays follow or occur without (if the two parties are very familiar with each other s voice) a self- identification sequence, but not prior to self-identification except in two cases (when the addressees are young or toddler-age nephews), which will be discussed in 5 2 4 To come back to our discussion of L2 discourse behavior, the two CAE cases which deviate from the sequence for self-identification followed by all adult AA speakers may suggest that the caller might be able to follow the typical English sequence of self- identification in unmarked situations. However, given the special circumstances of the 2 6 8 recipient's sickness, a marked context, her concern for the recipient and her perception of their relation (close colleagues) might have triggered her Chinese style for opening conversations between good friends. The second characteristic of caller self-identification observed in the CAE data projects some callers' tendency, in given circumstances, not to self identify' first but to ask the recipient to guess at her identity. This is illustrated in 2f?4. (2#4) OP A; (missing) C: Hello Is this Mrs. Carlos'^ A: Yes. —> C: You guess who I am. he he he (laughter). A: Your voice sounds familiar --> C: Yeah, this is Xiaoli. A: Oh yeah= C. =You forget about me already, he he he (laughter) A; No, you forget about us. C; No:; he he he (laughter) I, I. I. went back //two weeks A: //I know. 1 know you were gone. In this call, the caller is tr\ing to surprise the recipient and the guessing is supposed to provide an opportunity to build on their rapport and to make the opening more interesting and more interactive. However, this does not seem to have achieved the effect desired. The recipient did not recognize the voice, and she did not seem to be pleased on hearing the joking remark of the caller, "You forget about me already" Instead, she returned the blame onto the caller, half jokingly When interviewed, the Chinese participant explained that when she called friends with whom she used to keep frequent contact, especially those she had not talked to in a long 2 6 9 time, she would like to ask them to guess at the identity Although sometimes people tailed to recognize her voice, she felt they would not be offended but might feel a little embarrassed, at the most Actually this caller's preference for asking others to guess at her identity is exemplified in one of her calls in Chinese as well. Yet this is not the same reaction I elicited from all my panicipants who are native speakers of American English. When asked if they would feel annoyed being asked to guess at the caller's identity, some of the participants commented that they would feel (some say "a little") uncomfortable for being put on spot, for being asked to participate in a game they did not like, and for fear of making mistakes in guessing. (c) Phatic utterances There is phatic talk in every call in this category. Five of the calls include inquiries such as How are you. How are you doing'^ or How is it going, and one of the callers (2? 4) asked the recipient to guess at her identity as a ditVerent form of phatic interaction, as discussed above. Such an act is unlikely to be considered phatic according to criteria of American English, but it seems to bear significant resemblance to comments on voice recognition identified in the CC set of data. Since the callers" request pertains to the same theme as voice recognition, it is coded and perceived as a form of the phatic interaction (see the CC set of analysis in section 4 I) The sequence of openings in the six interactional calls in this group is shown in Table 4.21, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 7 0 T.ABLE4 21 CAE: Interactional N = 6 Opening Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greetin" 100 Greeting by A 100 Greeting by C 83 Acknowledument 83 Identification 100 SelflDbv A 17 Affirminu A's ID bv C 50 SelflDbv C 66 Phatic utterances B. Statement of Purpose All the calls in this group proceed with the purposes immediately after the phatic inquiry. In the call to a fellow student, the caller stated her purpose with the inquiry. "Did you go to school today!'" The call to the former landlady (2#4). on the other hand, conveys the caller's purpose through the inquiry. How are you doing'^ In other contexts, this How are you doing will serve as a phatic inquiry before the main talk begins However, in this 2 7 1 particular call, this phatic inquiry expresses the caller"s genuine interest in and concern for the recipient's well-being and is more appropriate to be perceived as the expression of the purpose of calling, given the post-phatic-inquiry structural position of this question Such interpretation is based on two factors; first, there is the phatic (at least from the Chinese perspective) exchange about who has forgotten whom (discussed above) that precedes the How are you doing. Secondly, a long sequence of talk about the caller s trip back home occurred prior to this How are you doing inquiry, which suggests that the inquiry is functioning more like a statement of purpose In some calls, purposes of calling are conveyed through statements such as How was Las Veuas'^ How are vou todav!* These inquiries indicate that there are specific things the speaker is interested in and indicate the purpose of calling as interactional. C. Closing (a) Pre-closinu Proportionately, more attempts at terminating calls are evidenced in this set of data (33% with pre-closing) than in the T calls for CAE. On the other hand, the percentage is consistent with that of other comparable groups, such as I calls in CC (35°o), AA (56°o). and CA (40°o) (b) Initiation of closing Sixty-six percent of the calls feature caller-initiated closings Linguistic forms include either reference to future contact (which is the most common in the corpus) or the enjoyment of conversing with the addressee. 2 7 2 For example, in the call 2M which is discussed earlier, we have the caller starting the closing with promise to visit the addressee later. (244) PC C: OK, I'll find some time to visit you both •A: All right. Xiaoli. Any time Just call us so that we're sure to be home. C: Yeah, and not to give your a surprise. A: Yeah, you'll be 1 might have a heart attack C: He he he (laughter) A. (laughter) C Probably Mr. Carlos will A: OK//Xiaoli C //OK /// Yeah A: ///Yeah IC C: and best regards // to A: // Thanks for calling C; to Mr Carlos .A: I will. LT C [Bye-bye. A: [Bye-bye Although this promise for a future visit is intended to be the initiation of closing, the joking about surprising them both brings in comments on a new topic briefly, and therefore "I will find time to v isit you both" is considered to be a pre-closing in the present analysis The remark •". . .and best regards to" is regarded as the initiation of closing instead. Other forms of closing include "Nice talk.. ." (incomplete as it overlaps with A's remarks) meaning Nice talking to you. "See you tomorrow morning."' and "See you. 1 don't know, what time see you " Recipients (native speakers of American English) initiating the closing often seem to make reference to future contact as well. They use the following expressions. "Talk to you later" and "I guess I'll see you .when. Thursday, uh'^" 2 7 3 (c) Phatic utterances Two-thirds of the closings address the theme of tliture contact. Other themes that are covered include regards to family or friends, and the enjoyment of talking with the addressee. (d) Leave-takiniz For leave-taking, the distribution of initiation is equally divided among callers, recipients, and simultaneous initiation. The length of leave-taking is typically two turns. The only two e.xceptions are 5#! and 5??4. (5#1) IC c [Nice talk A [Tell everybody hi. Say hi to Susan. Miss you and Susan C ok. A Ok. I will see you later. C //See you later A //Oh sav Dorian hi too C OK A OK LT Bye-bye C Hi your husband, OK'^ A OK C OK A Bye-bye; C Bve-bve In this call, the caller asks the recipient to say hi to her husband even after A has extended her leave-taking. This might mean two things. First, the caller has not finished all she wants to say by the time A is doing leave-taking. Secondly, from the caller's perspective, it is acceptable to continue with more remarks for closing even after leave- taking has started. This is precisely what often happens in Chinese leave-taking sequences. 2 7 4 as we have discussed earlier In this group of I calls for the CAE set. call 5^1 (cited abov e) contains more turns than others, with six turns as a total for leave-taking. (5^9) C All right A OK " C OK LT Bye-bye A: Bye-bye ~> C: Good night In 5#9, the caller adds "Good night" after the leave-taking, which is pragmatically inappropriate as "Goodnight" is used more often in face-to-face encounters and usually not following exchanges such as "Good-bye." All the other calls in this group terminate with two turns, one leave-taking from each party. The sequence of closings in the six interactional calls is shown in Table 4 22. along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 7 5 TABLE 4.22 CAE: Interactional N = 6 Closing Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closing 33 Initiation of closing 100 •> Initiation by A J J Initiation by C 67 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 66 Leave-taking 100 Initiation by A 34 -> Initiation by C J J •> Simultaneous initiation J J 4.4,3 Interactionai-Transactional Calls There are ten Interactionai-Transactional calls made by nativ e speakers of Chinese in English. Recipients include friends, fellow students, hostess, students, former teacher, and mother of daughter's friend in kindergarten. A. Opening (a) Greetinu Initial answers to calls are all realized in the form of Hello by recipients For callers" greeting, there is a similar pattern to that observed in the interactional calls for this group Of the ten calls, sixty percent are characterized with Hello in the callers" first turn. Other greeting forms include Hi. and Excuse me (in one case) Example 1??21 illustrates the use of Hello by the caller OP A Hello C Hello A Hi. C Hi. Is that Helen'^ A Yes, it i:s= C =this is Min Hua. A Hi. PH How are vou'^ There are some interesting phenomena here. Turn 2 and Turn 3 in this call are usually absent in conversations produced by native speakers of American English. Accordingly, instead of a Hi uttered by the caller first, which is the typical sequence in English telephone conversations, we have the first Hi by the recipient. In a way. we might perceive this Hi as having repaired the "glitch" in the conversation After the caller replies to the recipient s Hi and introduces herself the conversation then proceeds (b) Identification The relatively high percentage of caller self-identification is a salient feature of this group of calls Callers identity themselves for more than half of the calls (58%), which is Ill slightly higher than the comparable group of calls for the AA set (SO^ b) and much greater than the percentage for both CC (29°b) and CA (19°o). The proponion of identification in English over Chinese provides evidence that generally speaking, these second language speakers have become acutely aware of the need in English to identity' themselves at the beginning of a call Actually, it is not only whether one does or does not identify him/herself that is cross- culturally different; there is also differences in how one identifies oneself which can cause frustration, embarrassment, and misunderstanding in cross-cultural communication. Example (Is^IO) illustrates the different cultural concepts and the practice of introducing oneself in one particular context ~ the talk betw een parents whose children are friends in pre-school. Prior to this call, the two parties had their first talk over the phone the day before in which the recipient extended an invitation for the caller's daughter to go to a slumber party at her house. As this was the first experience for the caller's five-year-old daughter to spend a night with a friend instead of at home, the caller said she would discuss it with her husband and call back. The following is the opening section for the second call (1#20) OP A; Hello. C: Hello. ~> May I speak to Mrs. Jones'^ ~> A Hi, this is Cheri. C Um pardon'^ A This is Cheri C Oh he (laughter) PH A How are you'^ C Uh fine. —> This is Jenny's mother, you know, right —> A: Hi. Would vou sav vour first name for me 2 7 8 The caller, out of respect following the Chinese culture, called the recipient by her last name. However, the recipient was apparently not comfortable w ith such terms of address and therefore purposely replied, "This is Cheri." which asserts her first name The reply from the recipient was unexpected for the caller, and that is why the caller did not quite catch it and asked, "um pardon The caller was not familiar with the name "Cheri"" and her schemata were not activated for such a name Consequently, she missed it the first time she heard it. When the recipient repeated her first name second time a little more slowly, the caller realized "Cheri"" was in fact just the first name of "VIrs Jones" and could not help laughing, not at the caller's name, but in embarrassment at herself for not being able to catch the name, and for not realizing who it was. (But this kind of laughing can be misleading and mistaken in cross-cultural communication, as has been discussed by Gunthner 1993 b.) Nevertheless, the recipient might feel uncomfortable hearing the laughter, and she therefore resumed the conversation by asking the caller. How are you'^ without responding to the caller's laughter, probably not knowing how to interpret it. At this point, realizing that she needed to identify' herself to the recipient, the caller said, "This is Jean's mother, you know, right'^" The Hi from the recipient indicated her recognition of the caller, yet she still telt the introduction was not adequate - she did not even know the name of the caller. That is what prompted her to specifically request the first name of the caller This segment of the conversation is extremely interesting. It exemplifies the differences in identification between the Chinese and the American cultures as well as the 2 7 9 potential for misunderstanding The reason for the caller to identify- herself as Jean's mother is largely due to her cultural background and sociolinguistic rules of her native language: first of all, in Chinese, introduction using one's last name is common It is in fact more important than the first name because first name addressing usually occurs only with intimates or parents (although that is changing now. especially for the younger generation) Secondly, in interactions between parents of children who are in the same class or same school, it is typical for parents to introduce themselves (usually in face-to-face encounters) to each other or to teachers of their children as "i am \x"s mother or father" rather than by their ow n names. That is because the mentioning of the name of a specific child (who is the friend/classmate of their own child) will assist them in remembering the person and their status vis-a-vis each other in interaction. This also lends support to the observations about characteristics of societies w hich are relation- oriented in interaction (e.g. see Yum. 1988). Thirdly, to address one by title with last name is the preferable practice; therefore, addressing such as Manager Wang ( l .^ri'l!) and Director Zhao (itil L\:) are common. In any case, to address some child's parents by name and particularly by first name is inappropriate and impolite (especially persons one is not well acquainted with). This explains why the caller introduced herself as "Jean's mother, you know, righf^" But from an American cultural perspective, Cheri did not feel comfortable with such introduction of oneself Behaving in her American way. Cheri voiced her preference for first-name basis conversation. 2 S (» (c) Phatic utterances There are phatic utterances at the beginning of the conversations for the majority of calls (80%). As for the linguistic forms in which phatic interaction is encoded, there are How are you doing or How are you inquiries for most of the calls For one call, without waiting for the recipient s reply to the How are you inquiry, the caller immediately followed up with another question. "You remember me'^" The comment "You remember me" in this case is similar to the comment. "You forget about me already." in another interactional call (2^4) discussed above. Thus we can see that for Chinese women, whether one is remembered or forgotten is one of the favorite topics discussed among friends. jokingly or half jokingly These comments, hovve\er. may not be favored by American friends in the same way There is one call in which phatic talk is present according to a Chinese perspective, but it may not be perceived the same way by native speakers of .American English. This is the first call between the two parents discussed in the last section (1^17). (1=17) OP A: Hello C: Hello //Mrs. Jones'^ A: //Ye. yes. C: Oh this is Jean's mother. A: Hi (xx) --> C: So your baby is still crying. A: Well, you know what, I'm baby-sitting for a girl friend of mine. It's not my dau, it's not my baby. It's my girl friend's baby When the caller said. "So your baby is still crying." she was commenting on what she heard on the phone: the baby was crying. In the interview with her. the caller explained that 2 S I she actually felt embarrassed hearing the baby crying and was afraid this might not be a good time to call because Cheri might need to take care of the baby Yet she did not know how she could phrase such thoughts and feelings in spite of her fluent English. The comment "So your baby is still crying" was therefore meant to provide an opportunity for Cheri, if she would like, to respond with comments such as "Yes Can you call back later'^" With the intention of expressing empathy and understanding for being a mother, the caller made reference to the fact that the baby was still crying. Yet it was not clear how her comments were interpreted In fact, the recipient seemed to be quite concerned the next time she was called, and she apologized right at the beginning about the baby crying over their telephone conversation last time There is only one call in which such phatic inquiry is absent: it is a call answered by the roomate of the intended recipient The sequence of openings in the ten Interactional-Transactional calls is show n in Table 4. 23, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 8 2 TABLE 4 23 CAE: Interactional-Transactional N =10 Opening Percentage of Occurrence Subtotal Total Greeting 100 Greeting by A 100 Greeting by C 90 Acknowledgment 60 Identification 90 Self ID by A 0 .Affirming A's ID by C 60 Self ID by C 60 Phatic utterances 80 B. Statement of Purpose Purposes of calls are communicated in difterent forms including the following: "Would you please give me some suggestions "i just want to tell you that . " "Yesterday. I call you. You get my message"^"" "You still working Alpine High School'^" Most of these statements seem to be direct and straight forward. However, the first request "Would you please give me some suggestions" is not only polite, but fairly formal This is the way the caller expresses her purpose in her call to a fellow student for some 2 8 3 advice with regard to social customs When asked if she w as aware of the formal register she had used for the request, the caller gave a positive answer Meanwhile, she said somehow the expression just came to her automatically, probably due to the intensive drills in language classes she went through back in China when she was studying English However, she said she often used this expression Would vou please because to her, it would enhance politeness This example is illustrative of the need for non-native speakers to sharpen their sensitivity to the differences in register and linguistic forms. Had the American friend she called held the same view of "politeness equals friendliness" as mentioned earlier in the AA set, the caller might have been perceived as not only distant, but also impolite C. Closing (a) Pre-closing Pre-closing in CAE is observed in twenty percent of the calls, showing some similarity with the pattern in the CA set (12®o). much greater than CC (5°o), and much less than AA (29%). It may be seen as near the mid-point of a continuum. (b) Initiation of closinu Eighty percent of the calls have caller-initiated closings with the other twenty percent consisting of recipient-initiated closings. Linguistic forms used by callers (native speakers of Chinese) include Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll talk to you later, and See you tomorrow/Saturday. However, thanking is the most often used token to initiate the closing, occurring in sixty-six percent of the calls. 2 8 4 (c) Phatic utterances Eighty percent of the calls contain phatic talk before they close One of the two calls without phatic utterances at the closing is answered by an unacquainted person For the closings with phatic content, fijture contact is the most often addressed theme with thanking ranking the second. There is only one case with wishing-well comments No mention of families is found As has been explained in the definitions for coding, although there is thanking occurring in ever\- single call, either expressed by the caller or the recipient, thanking is considered to be phatic utterance only when it is not taking the staictural position for initiation of closing (d) Leave-taking Leave-taking initiation is divided among callers, recipients, and simultaneous or overlapping production. Almost all the leave-taking sequences consist of two turns; there is one exception The fact that leave-taking does not go beyond a two-turn length in this set of calls is significant, it suggests that when doing leave-taking in English, native speakers of Chinese in this study are not simply using the English code They are also following the discourse pattern for the leave-taking routine in English. In other words, their pragmatic competence for leave- taking has achieved a level where the discourse pattern in Chinese is not carried over into their second language leave-taking exchange. When they conduct leave-taking in English, there is no presence of repetitive leave-taking as in their Chinese 2 8 5 The one call that goes beyond two turns is a call to an international student from a native speaker of Chinese working as an instructor In this case, the reoccurrence of Bye seems to be due to the recipient's simultaneous remarks of "'See you in class. OK'j'" (Iffl9) IC C: See you tomorrow A: Thank you very much Mrs. Zhen for understanding evervthing. C: Uh hum OK. LT //Bye-bye. A: //See you in class. OK'^ C; OK C: [Bye. A: [Bye The sequence of openings in the ten Interactional-Transactional calls is show n in Table 4. 24, along with the percentage of calls which includes each element. 2 8 6 TABLE 4. 24 CAE: Interactional-Transactional N = 10 Closing Percentaue of Occurrence Subtotal Total Pre-closina 20 Initiation of closina 100 Initiation bv A 20 Initiation bv C 80 Simultaneous initiation 0 Phatic utterances 80 Leave-takina 100 Initiation bv A 40 Initiation bv C 30 Simultaneous initiation 30 The follow ing chapter will compare the findings discussed here along each of the dimensions which were posed for analysis in this research: social setting, linguistic code, first versus second language speaker, and types of talk 2 8 7 CHAPTER 5: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Comparisons in this chapter will be conducted along four dimensions: (1) comparison between the CC set and the CA set of data to examine the effect of social and cultural setting of the Chinese and American society respectively on the use of Chinese as a native language, (2) comparison between the CC set and the AA set of data to examine the differences and similarities across the two languages/cultures (Chinese and English), (3) comparison between the AA set and the CAE set of data to examine the similarities and differences in the use of English by native speakers of English and Chinese speakers of English for whom English is a second language, (4) comparison among the different types of telephone conversations (transactional calls, interactional calls and Interactional- Transactional calls) in the four sets of data (CC, AA. CA, CAE) 5.1 Social and Cultural Setting Both CC and C A sets of data are provided by native speakers of Chinese Nevertheless, while participants for the CC set interacted in their home countrv-. the environment in which the conversational interaction took place for the CA set of data is quite different First, the dominant language of the society in which CA participants are residing is American English. Secondly, the American society, which features diverse cultural traditions, is substantially different from the Chinese culture Thirdly, the social, economic, and political systems of the two countries show divergence in various aspects. It is against such a background that these comparisons will proceed. 2 S 8 Several salient patterns emerge comparing the CC data with the CA data regarding initial greeting, caller identification, caller's greeting, statement of purpose, interactional pattern in closing, and code switching. A table of percentage comparison of the different elements between CC and CA data (Table 5.1) is included at the end of this section 5.1.1 Initial Greeting in T calls The first striking difference lies in the unfailing presence of identification by recipients in business calls recorded in the U S compared with the prevalent practice of callers affirming the places reached in China. The sharp contrast in the percentage of recipient self-identification e\ idently reflects the influence of the social and cultural setting on the norms of discourse behavior: w hile it is rare in China for businesses or services reached to provide names of the enterprises or institutions for callers (8%): it is the standard practice in the U.S. for businesses and institutions to identify' themselves in their answers to summons (100° o) Such contrast is not accidental; it is the result of basic social and cultural differences. To announce the name of the businesses or institutions reached in recipients" first turn demonstrates their realization of the need to provide their identity for the callers. In other words, the called party is taking on the responsibility of self-identification. Such a procedure eliminates the need for the caller to confirm the identity of the number reached. On the other hand, when such a procedure is not part of the routine for answering telephone calls, callers usually check on the identity of the enterprises reached before they present their purposes of calls In such cases, it is callers' responsibility to affirm recipients" identity. 2 8 9 The issue of who shoulders the responsibility of identification is not an idiosyncratic phenomenon. The U S practice of recipients providing for self-identification in business calls mirrors the "customers first" principle of the free market economy and business w orld in the U S. Whether it is to provide serv ice or information, businesses will provide for customers as much as possible to compete for their patronage or to win over potential customers. Being a socialist economy in the past, with almost all the enterprises owned by the state or collective entities, enterprises in China definitely did not share such values and mentality Therefore, if customers desire to be assured of whom they have reached by telephone, they will need to affirm the identity of the addressees themselves Names of businesses or institutions reached will not be protTered automatically. Apparently, businesses owned by, operated by, or provided for overseas Chinese in the U.S. are following the norms and expectations of the dominant culture. That is why all the recipients representing businesses or institutions identity themselves in their very first turn when answering telephone calls 5.1.2 Caller Self-identification For both I calls and I-T calls, the percentage of caller self-identification for the CC set is approximately ten percent higher than that of the CA set (1: CC 24°o. CA 13°o. I-T: CC 29%. C.A. 19%). The disparity between the two sets of data can be accounted for by both the environments in which the interaction takes place and the dynamics of interaction between the CC and CA participants For the CC set. as the participants are living in their home country, their social network is e.vtensive and, therefore, they have broader social contact. That is probably why, for instance, their 1 calls are made to recipients whom the 2 y 0 participants have not been in touch for a while and calls are rarely made repeatedly to the same person. In other words, the participants in China had a larger social network from which to select their recorded telephone calls during the period of data collection (approximately ten days) When participants residing in the U S recorded their calls, in spite of the relatively longer time period for recording (a minimum of two weeks and in most cases longer). many of the calls were made to the same persons with whom they had their previous telephone conversations recorded: i.e.. possible recipients for recording calls are more limited, and a number of the taped calls are thus between the same interlocutors. It follow s that both confirmation of recipients and caller self-identification in the CA set show consistently lower percentages than those in the CC set For T calls, however, while the CA set displays no self-identit'ication, there are few cases of caller-identification in the CC set (12°o). As mentioned earlier, these cases are counted in as identification but the callers actually identified themselves either by category ('This is a customer") or by association ('I'm the one who bought the washer"). 5.1.3 Caller's Greeting Percentage of caller's greeting for the CA set in both I calls and I-T calls shows a pattern of increase compared with that in the CC set, w ith significant increase in I-T calls particularly (I; CC CA 62%: I-T: CC 52%, CA 92%) The T calls show a decrease for the CA set and will be discussed separately. The direction of increase in this component from CC to CA suggests possible convergence of CA with the AA set 2 9 1 One factor that may account for part of the increase in the presence of caller" s greeting in the CA set is the influence of English greetings on the native speakers of Chinese living in the U.S. This influence may affect those speakers at two levels: first, the English expression for greeting in the form of "Hello" and "Hi" seem to hold advantages in terms of semantics and pragmatics compared with the constraints of greetings in Chinese English greetings are applicable in almost all contexts (with variance in use between the two), and therefore are handy social lubricants for communication. Secondly, frequent use of these greetings in English may have reinforced Chinese speakers" reliance on greeting even when they conduct conversations in Chinese. In the case of T calls, the percentage comparison across the two settings seems to present an inconsistent picture (T: CC 75"o. CA 50° o). or a decrease from CC to CA instead of an increase as in I and I-T calls. The disparity may have been caused, to a large extent, by the fact that close to one-third of the T calls in the CA set involve special opening sequences. As mentioned in Chapter 4. in the CA set, almost one-third of the T calls are directed to telephone companies, and these calls follow a pattern for opening sequence which is distinct from other calls. Instead of greeting callers in English as for others in the CA set. these calls are answered in Chinese from the outset. More significantly, the initial greeting (first turn) always involves a direct request from the recipients for either the caller's home phone number or the extension desired. Rather than the general "May I help you'^" type of greeting, which is prototypical for other T calls, such inquiries ask for specific information from callers and therefore preclude callers" potential greeting in their responses In other 2') 2 words, the percentage of caller's greeting in the CA set of T calls might have been reduced significantly due to the telephone company's inquiries in the first turn with a specific information requirement. 5.1.4 Statement of Purpose in I Calls Although there are I calls in both the CC set and CA set, the ways in which purposes of calls are presented seem to show considerable differences with regard to the choice of expressions. For the CC set. we have inquiries in forms such as j'/'AL J' 'Long time no talk/no see.' f'j; "How is your health'^" ('j^tr.' "Are you busy'^' "How are you'^" These inquiries indicate speakers" concern for the addressees as well as their respect for the addressees or status difference between them (due to age or relationship) In the CA set, however, we have inquiries or statements that are quite different, including in ;}(; 4j' j'H'i ? "How is your headache'^" .1; f'r •' "How is your visit back home"^" i? "What's up'^" , W >v: "Nothing. Just to chat." These expressions of purpose are more specific, direct, with few softening touches. Clearly, the two parties in the CA set are of more equal status and. therefore, the choice of language to show respectfijiness is not relevant On the contrary, formality and respect might only suggest distance. Moreover, the reference to specific events indicate that the two parties have been in frequent contact with each other so that the callers are well-acquainted with recent happenings in the lives of the addressees. 2 9 3 This observ ed difference in statements of purpose probably derives largely from the difference in social status and the relation between the parties involved In the CC set, 1 calls are made to mothers, aunts, former teacher, friends, colleagues, and other acquaintances of more advanced age. and consequently receiving more respect Furthermore, most of the I calls in the CC set are made to recipients whom the callers have not contacted for some time and therefore the choice of expressions would be more courteous, with statements of purpose tending to be more general for interactional purpose. On the other hand, in the CA set, all the I calls are conducted between friends with the exception of one call which is made to the mother of one participant. We may characterize the relations for the dyads in most calls in the CA set with the following features: close relationship, frequent contact, common experiences of living abroad, and the provision as well as reception of mutual help among the interlocutors These conditions have enabled these interlocutors to use more direct but seemingly less courteous expressions with each other 5,1.5 Interaction Patterns in Closing for T Calls Interactional patterns between T calls in the CC set and the CA set also exhibit sharp contrast. In the CC set of calls, we have an overwhelming lack of reciprocal exchanges in closing, and a low percentage of leave-taking sequences (3 l°b) In contrast, in the CA set, leave-taking is present in the overwhelming majority of calls (92° o) Furthermore, for the CC set, recipients often do not respond to callers" initiation of leave-taking and seldom initiate leave-taking themselves (caller initiation of leave-taking: 80° o; recipient initiation of leave-taking: 20%), while in the CA set, there is equal distribution (33%) between callers 2 «J 4 and recipients in terms of initiation of leave-taking, suggesting similar levels of enthusiasm for participation in the interaction and similar social status between the two parties Furthermore, we have noticed that in the CA set pre-closing is present in a few cases, but it is not observed in the CC set Although the percentage in CA is not high (25°o), it is significant in that its presence is consistent w ith differences in other aspects of discourse behavior between the two sets. Specifically, in those twenty-five percent of the calls, it is the customers who were ready to terminate the calls, but the service people were offering more information to the customers Such a phenomenon is viewed as demonstrating eagerness and enthusiasm by the service representatives in their conversations with customers. On the whole, although T calls in the CA set are conducted in Mandarin, these calls seem to exemplifV' many characteristics shared by T calls in the AA set regarding opening, closing, and interactional patterns 5.1.6 Code Switching in Opening One of the major differences between the CC data and the CA data concerns the choice of language code. For telephone calls recorded in China, all the conversations are conducted in Chinese throughout: either in Shanghai dialect or in Mandarin This is not the case with calls recorded in the U.S., and code switching is common. It is certainly not surprising that for calls recorded in the U S., the initial answer to summons in the overwhelming majority of cases is the English Hello rather than the Chinese I'LiJ. This is to be expected because callers are residing in a society in which 2 9 5 English, instead of Chinese, is the dominant language, and recipients do not know when answering w hich language the caller speaks. As we can see from the examples of T calls provided below, code switching is achieved in different ways in given contexts. In cases of calls made to telephone companies, the calls are mostly conducted in Mandarin from the beginning as the lines are specifically designated as "hotlines" served by representatives who speak Chinese. In other situations, some recipients switch to Mandarin automatically after announcing the name of the business in English, as in examples (5#7) below . Others reply to the callers" chosen code after hearing the callers" Mandarin, or change the code at the request of the caller as in the case of 5^3 (5#7) --> OP A. Hello F G Travel —> ii'i m qing jiang please speak Can I help you'^ (5ff3) OP A: China Garden —> May I help you'^ C: Uh: Can 1 speak to: Mandarin"^ A: Yeah C: OK A: OK --> ii'i in] ^ fl- 2 9 6 qing wen ni yao xie shen me please ask you want some what How can I help you Not only is there code switching in recipients" answers or in the following turns, callers also demonstrate code sw itching in openings of the telephone calls. For the CA set. in many of the I calls and I-T calls, especially calls made by those bilinguals whose English is fluent, callers' greetings to their addressees are often in English rather than in Chinese (i.e.. they frequently greet the recipients with Hello after the recipients answer the calls with Hello). After the English Hello, the code is switched to Chinese starting with addressing the recipient 5.1.7 Code Switching in Closing In addition to opening of telephone conv ersations, leave-taking exemplifies salient code switching patterns. As a matter of fact, examining all the calls in the CA set, leave- taking conducted in Chinese is observ ed in less than one-fifth of the calls whereas calls end with English leave-taking from both parties in over half There are a number of calls that end with mixed codes, i.e., one party uses Chinese while the other party uses English It is also worth noting that Bye or Bye-bye are the only English forms observed; Good-bye is not observed at all. whether in business calls or calls between friends. For example, for T calls, out of the eleven leave-takings, only one is conducted in Chinese; the other ten all end with at least one occurrence of Bye or Bye-bye Some leave- takings are produced by callers while others are uttered by recipients OK usually precedes Bye but there are also cases in which Bye-bye is used without OK as antecedent For example: 2 9 7 (3^12) ic c: m m f'l: m. xie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot A: 'C= bu ke qi not courteous Don't mention it C: =uh hum A: m m xie xie thank thank Thank you. —> LT C: [Bye-bye —> A: [Bye-bye It seems that the switching from Chinese to English leave-taking is extremely natural, smooth, and automatic for these participants: ver\' often the two parties both code-switch simultaneously When asked if they are aware of code switching for leave-taking, most participants who have demonstrated such behavior do not seem to notice it. The predominant pattern of conducting leave-taking in English for CA calls suggests that "Bye-bye" has almost become part of the vocabulary for daily communication of some of the Chinese participants. The Chinese leave-taking ft)' IAL "Good-bye/Bye" is rarely evidenced by these participants in their Chinese conversations. When interv iewed, some of the participants commented that they were used to the English leave-taking expression and did not seem to be even aware of it. One participant from Shanghai noted that she had been so accustomed to Bye that it is only when she called 2 9 8 her mother or some other elder relatives (who do not know any English) that she used Chinese leave-taking. When conversing with others, she used Bye all the time One participant explained that even in her own dialect Cantonese, the Mandarin form of t'}- •Good-bye/Bve" is rarelv used by speakers because the expression sounds formal and non local. Frequently, telephone conversations in Cantonese terminate with phrases such as h 'Talk to you next time' without leave-taking. That is probably why Bye or Bye- bye have become so popular and have been w ell assimilated among speakers of Cantonese Even for radio stations or TV channels in Cantonese, newscasters use Bye-bye when their programs are o\ er, the participant informed me. 2 9 «> TABLE 5 1 Comparison between CC and CA data N = Total number of calls CC CA N 16 23 \9 12 26 22 T 1-T I T l-T I Greeting By A Q2 100 100 67 100 95 ByC 75 52 53 50 92 62 Self-identification By A 8 0 0 100 0 0 ByC 12 29 24 0 19 13 Phatic Utterances 0 57 95 0 54 90 Pre-closing 0 5 35 25 12 40 Closing By A 0 27 12 0 22 15 BvC 100 68 88 91 78 85 5. 2 Language and culture: Chinese and English In this section, I will compare the calls recorded in China by native speakers of Chinese (CC) with the calls recorded in the U S. by native speakers of American English 3 (I 0 (AA) Discussions will proceed in the following order caller identification, caller s greeting, phatic utterances, sequencing of identification and phatic utterances, closing expressions, and leave-taking. A table of percentage comparison of different elements between CC and .\A data (Table 5 2) is included at the end of this section 5.2.1 Caller Identincation Caller identification constitutes one of the major differences across the two languages and cultures The percentage for T calls. I calls and I-T calls in the CC set is 12%. 24° o and 29%, and for the AA set. it is 41° o, 22° o, and 50° o for the same categories The I calls show approximately the same percentage in the CC and AA sets of data, but native speakers of American English identify- themselves more in telephone conversations for T calls and I-T calls than native speakers of Chinese. As for the 1 calls, although the percentage of caller identification is slightly higher for the CC set than the A.A set, the relations between the dyads need to be taken into consideration for analysis While 44° o of the dyads in the 1 calls for the AA set are between intimate relations such as mother-daughter or sisters, only 21° o of the 1 calls in the CC set are between such relations. The more-than-double of the number of calls between intimate relations, and therefore higher possibility of voice recognition, in the A.A. set may have largely contributed to the lower percentage of caller identification in the I calls. The percentage of caller identification in the AA set for I calls might have been much higher had the distribution of the relations between the dyads been similar to the CC language group. Furthermore, examples in Chapter 4 have provided detailed accounts of the strong preference by native speakers of Chinese to achieve caller recognition through voice 3 (I I sample rather than by pronouncement Some Chinese callers explicitly invite recipients to guess at their identity first, which seems to constitute part of the phatic interaction. As the transcripts show, self-identification often occurs as the last resort. In addition, voice recognition is verbally commented upon, which suggests that it is part of rapport building To have one's voice recognized is appreciated and worth mentioning. 5.2.2 Caller's Greeting With regard to greetings from callers, there are some differences across the two cultures. In Chinese telephone conversations, addressing the other party is important especially in cases with interlocutors who are parents, relatives who are elders, superiors, or persons of social standing. Greetings such as "Hi" or 'Hello' are usually not appropriate in those situations In English telephone conversations, on the other hand, greeting can occur without addressing even in conversations with parents or teachers. For example, "Hi" occurs \ er\- often in conversations with mothers without addressing terms. In Chinese, this is unacceptable; it will be considered extremely rude to greet one's seniors or superiors (such as parents, for example) without addressing them. As a matter of fact, none of the greetings we have observ ed in Chinese can replace addressing in interactions that involve interlocutors of higher social status 5.2.3 Phatic Utterances There are also significant differences across the two cultures in both linguistic forms of phatic utterances and how phatic interaction is conducted. For native speakers of Chinese, phatic interaction is conducted in many forms and can be realized in diff"erent ways For 3 (» 2 instance, to ask what the other party is doing between interlocutors who are familiar with each other is one of the most common ways of starting conversations. Voice recognition is another favorite theme for women (it is not clear if this applies for men as well). The inquiry about whether one is dining is a common phatic inquiry at meal time (and usually not intended as a disturbance check), but answers to the inquiry are perceived and interpreted differently among native speakers of Chinese. Some Chinese people may not be bothered by the fact that the recipient is actually dining when she is being called Others, on hearing that the recipient is having a meal, will either conduct the call rapidly or ask if it is necessary to call later. Those Chinese residing in the L' S. often start telephone calls to their friends with inquiries or statements regarding their last unsuccessful attempt to contact the addressee. There are various ways native speakers of Chinese conduct phatic interaction at the outset of telephone conversations. Comparatively speaking, phatic utterances in the openings of English conversations seem to be more routinized. How are you'^ and How are you doing"^ are the most common expressions evidenced in the corpus. Other common expressions include How is it going'^ The frequency of phatic utterances in I calls across the two languages are similar Vet the frequency of phatic utterance in I-T calls for the CC set is lower than that of the A.A set, with 57% occurrence for the Chinese data and 71°b for the English data. The lower frequency of phatic utterances in the CC set of I-T calls provides evidence that native speakers of Chinese follow a more "direct' pattern for discourse than Americans do in their I-T calls. The findings therefore present a challenge to the prevalent stereotype that the 3 0 3 discourse pattern ofnative speakers ofCiiinese is invariably "indirect " On the contrarv. the natural conversation data in this study present native speakers of Chinese as demonstrating a more direct conversational style than native speakers of American English when they have specific matters to discuss over the phone Compared with native speakers of English, native speakers of Chinese conduct less small talk before they proceed with the main purpose of calling in I-T calls. To generalize Chinese discourse pattern as 'indirect" in all situations is thus undoubtedly inaccurate; indeed, if we were to make claims solely based on the data collected for this study, we might conclude that the native speakers of American English follow an "indirect" pattern when presenting purpose of calls compared with native speakers of Chinese, but that would also be overly simplistic. An appropriate level of "directness" depends on contextual factors such as the nature of calls and the relations between the interlocutors. The general consensus from my participants is that one can be direct and dispense with formulaic or politeness expressions with family or good friends, but it is not the case with persons one is less well acquainted with. 5.2.4 Sequencing or identification and phatic utterances It has been assumed that there are universals for the sequences in telephone conversation openings: identification is presumed as indispensable prior to exchanges of phatic utterances (e.g., Schegloff 1986; Hopper 1992) Recorded telephone calls in English collected for this study have verified the validity of such a principle in English with the exception of two calls One call features the phatic inquiry preceding caller identification and the other call contains both phatic inquiry (preceding) and call identification (following) in the same turn. 3 0 4 which is called tvvo-in-one turn with reverse order in the present study It is worth noting that it is the same caller for both calls, and the recipients are young nephews to the caller in both cases, the first being four years old and the second being ten years old. Discussing the sequences demonstrated in these calls, the participant views such sequences in calling as purposefijl but non-coincidental; these sequences reflect her conscious effort in communication with her knowledge of her interlocutors. In the first case, recognizing the voice of her four-year-old nephew and being keenly aware of his yet limited communicative competence, the caller considers it too formal and a lack of friendliness if she simply identifies herself first without some verbal interaction Furthermore, she enjoys speaking with her baby nephew who is learning to socialize with the language. Therefore, for the caller, an opening phatic inquiry adds a touch of friendliness to the interaction. In the other case, the recipient has different personality and discourse behavior which the caller is well aware of - her nephew's curtness in conversation. Nevertheless, the caller still hopes to project her friendliness, but she does so without actually expecting a reply from him to her phatic inquiry, and therefore, she follows her phatic inquiry with self- identification in the same turn without waiting for the recipient to respond. Such a sequence deviates from the prescribed opening sequences in telephone conversations and has not been observed in recorded calls by other American participants Such a sequence, the caller commented, indicates her intimate relation yet infrequent contact with her interlocutor. It puts her friendliness on an intimate level "right off the bat " 3 (> 5 In spite of the fact that this participant felt comfortable with such a sequence, she emphasized that in American culture, it is unacceptable to direct a phatic inquiry- to one s interlocutor and then actually expect a reply prior to self-identification if one is certain that her interlocutor cannot recognize her voice. In other words, she might say How are you"* and then immediately state her name in one turn when she calls a friend whom she has not contacted for a while, but definitely she will not stop and expect a reply to her How are you from her friend before she identities herself This is because it is the caller s responsibility to identify oneself prior to interaction, an American convention. In a few of the Chinese I calls and I-T calls, however, this is not the case Phatic utterances are addressed to recipients and are responded to by recipients prior to the establishment of caller identification. Neither the callers nor the recipients seem to be uncomfonable with such a sequence Interviews with Chinese participants in the U S have corroborated the commonality of such a sequence in Chinese telephone conversations. It seems that such sequences are more likely to take place either in 1 calls or 1-T calls that are closer to I calls in nature when interlocutors are not pressed for time and the interaction of phatic inquiries provides an ample voice sample for voice recognition during the process The smooth openings in these natural telephone conversations pose a challenge to the universal claim of the core sequences of telephone conversation openings; in Chinese telephone conversations, identification does not necessarily always precede phatic inquiry Interestingly enough, it can be accomplished during the process of phatic interaction, and sometimes it is achieved without explicit verbalization. 3 0 6 5.2.5 Linguistic Forms for Closing Linguistic forms for closing telephone conversations demonstrate few differences between the two languages The most common ways for native speakers of Chinese to express the intention to terminate the calls are ("So much for now" or j' "That's it " These expressions, as we can see, do not address any phatic themes at all; they are matter-of-fact statements, conveying the message that now we can terminate the call. Forms for initiation of closings in English, however, all entail some phatic themes For example. Thanks for calling. Talk to you later, I will see you tomorrow, or Nice talking to you. The use of Thank you. in addition, patterns differently across the two cultures: whereas Thank you for calling is a common expression in English telephone conversations. Thank you is only used between relations that are non-intimate in Chinese: the closer the relation, the less likely Thank you will occur. This is because in Chinese culture, verbal expression of gratitude is not considered as important as what one does in return in the fijture for the benevolence receiv ed (Chang & Holt. 1994). It is inappropriate and may make both parties feel uncomfortable to explicitly verbalize gratitude in some situations, such as interaction with intimates. 5.2.6 Leave-taking The interaction patterns for leave-taking reveal significant differences between the two languages as well. While leave-taking in Chinese conversations between family members, friends, or acquaintances tends to involve multi-turn sequences, there is almost always a 3 0 7 two-tum stnjcture in English Moreover, Chinese leave-taking jl}- !AL "Good-bye/Bye" does not necessarily flinction as the terminal exchange in Chinese conversations; in fact. quite often, speakers continue to exchange phatic comments after the initial leave-taking is extended. In English, on the other hand, leave-taking clearly serves as the terminal exchange; any variant sequence would be extremely unusual In addition, a tripartite structure for leave-taking in Chinese often occurs in calls wherein the speaker initiating leave-taking tends to produce a second leave-taking in turn three of the exchanges. 3 0 8 TABLE 5 2 Comparison between CC and AA data N = Total number of calls CC AA N 16 23 19 52 48 9 T I-T I T 1-T 1 Greeting By A 92 100 100 51 100 100 ByC 75 52 53 86 85 89 Self-identification By A 8 0 0 100 0 0 ByC 12 29 24 41 50 22 Phatic Utterances 0 57 95 12 71 89 Pre-closinu 0 5 35 6 29 56 Closin"O By A 0 27 12 13 30 50 ByC 100 68 88 85 68 50 5. 3 Native Language Versus Second Language Discussions in this section are based on the comparison between the AA set of calls and the CAE data Examination of the similarities and differences between the calls 3 (» 9 conducted by native speakers of American English and Chinese speakers for whom English is their second language will cover the following aspects; caller identification, caller"s greeting, purpose statement, and phatic utterances for closing A table of percentage comparison of the different elements between AA and CAE data (Table 5 3) is included at the end of this section 5.3.1 Caller Identification For caller identification, native speakers of American English identity themselves eighteen percent more in T calls than non-native speakers do (AA 41 °o. CAE 25°o) But the disparity shows a turn of direction for other types of calls: for I calls, non-native speakers identify themselves three times more than native speakers do (AA: 22°o, CAE 66%), a dramatic difference in frequency distribution Findings in the I-T group manifest higher percentage for caller identification by non-native speakers, but the gap is narrower between the two groups, with the A.A producing 50° o and the C.AE 60° o For the T calls in the CAE set of data, the lower percentage of caller identification points to the fact that non-native speakers are not aware of or accustomed to the practice of identify ing oneself in business calls, although they demonstrate aw areness of such need in I or I-T calls. This is verified in interv iew s with the participants Some of them commented that they were under the impression that in business calls, it was only necessary to identify oneself when asked For the comparison between the AA and CAE interactional calls, two points need to be made: first, and probably more importantly, for those calls initiated by native speakers of Chinese, not all callers and recipients conduct such calls on a regular basis. Therefore, 3 I 0 identification is certainly necessary Secondly, unlike the situation in the C.A£ set, for the I calls recorded by native speakers of American English, some conversations are between dyads who have kept frequent contact with each other over the telephone on a regular basis, even a number of times in a week. Therefore, there is no need for caller self- identification These two factors might have added considerable weight in terms of the frequency of identification for callers in both groups, thus widening the gap betw een them On the whole, however, the percentage for the CAE 1 calls shows t'lat non-native speakers have become aware of the need to identify themselves in calls conducted in English to friends or acquaintances and have striven to follow such discourse pragmatics in English (compare the C.AE 66° o in 1 calls w ith the 24° o for caller-self identification in the CC set of I calls). Nonetheless, caller self-identification is not always realized successfijlly in the same sequence as that of the natives Further analysis of the 1-T calls illustrates that non-native speakers show an even higher percentage (60°o) than that of the native speakers (50°o) in identification Given that the average identification percentage for Chinese data as indicated in the CC set is lower than that of English (29° o versus .^0%), non-native speakers" higher percentage in English telephone conversations for self-identification demonstrates their accomplishment in following the pragmatics of the target language. In spite of the higher percentage of caller identification demonstrated in the I and 1-T calls, transcripts of some of the calls reveal that there are still areas for potential miscommunication in identification The examples discussed in Chapter 4 illustrate an instance wherein a non-native caller invites the recipient to guess at her identity and the 3 1 1 ensuing comments regarding voice recognition. Another case of possible miscommunication concerns the non-native caller's identification of herself by association rather than by name. Both these cases seem to have resulted in some brief discomfort at least for the American recipients, as their verbal responses indicate Caller identification, therefore, seems to involve important cultural differences and may cause miscommunication 5.3.2 Caller's Greeting Greeting by callers in English telephone conversations takes either the form of Hi or Hello, as observed by Schegloff( 1979). The findings in the native speakers" data show the occurrence of Hi as greeting in a majority of the calls, but Hello is found in most calls in English conducted by native speakers of Chinese. There are a few cases in which the callers reply to recipients" Hello with another Hello which constitutes a single turn. Such a response results in recipient"s Hi in the third turn, rendering a different sequence for telephone conversations in English. That is because callers usually address the identification/recognition issue in the second turn by either asking for the intended recipient if they cannot recognize the person who answers, or addressing the recipient with an interrogative intonation contour for confirmation or disconfirmation. But none of these forms occur in the second turn in these few calls Consequently, there are a few openings in which recipients, instead of callers, initiate Hi which seems to be atypical When asked if they perceive any differences between the use of Hello and Hi, the Chinese participants consider Hello to be a more formal greeting while Hi is used when one 3 I 2 converses with someone she is more famihar with But none of them have mentioned the difference in the use of the greetings between face-to-face encounters and telephone conversations. 5.3.3 Statement of Purpose It is only natural and predictable that linguistic forms used by native speakers demonstrate a much wider variety than those used by non-native speakers Furthermore, levels of formality entailed in some expressions may not be perceived by non-native speakers when stating their purposes for calling. For example, one participant uses the expression Would you please, in her call to a fellow student asking for some information It is not clear what effect such an utterance has produced on the addressee. It is conceivable that the recipient might not feel comfortable, and that the use of such an expression might have placed more distance between the caller and her unintentionally When interviewed, the caller explained that the overuse of the expression Would you please. .. might be due to the effect of the intensive drill with it she underwent in China In addition, Chinese speakers were not aware of the use of past tense such as I wanted to . or I needed to... in business calls, which were common in T calls conducted by native speakers of English. 5.3.4 Phatic Utterances for Closing While most native speakers of Chinese in this study seem to feel quite at ease with the use of phatic utterances such as How are you or How are you doing in openings of telephone conversations, they are not as familiar with phatic expressions for closing in 3 I 3 English. As a matter of fact, the range of expressions produced by native speakers of Chinese is fairly limited in this respect. Overall. Thank you is the most often used expression to initiate closings, and expressions to the effect of See you tomorrow is the next. Apart from those, there are only a few other expressions used by non-native speakers One of the participants specifically mentioned that she often felt the lack of expressions for closing conversations in English in spite of her overall fluency Responses to phatic comments initiated by native speakers also seem to be a challenge, as it is sometimes difficult for non-native speakers to respond when they do not know what other linguistic options are available In Chinese, people often repeat their interlocutors" utterance to show agreement, but this is not appropriate in English Therefore, when native speaker interlocutors say. We'll talk to you later, for lack of other expressions to respond, non-native speaker interlocutors usually reply with OK. 3 1 4 TABLE 5.3 Comparisson between AA and CAE data N = Total number of calls AA C.AE N 52 48 9 24 10 6 T I-T I T I-T I Greeting By A 51 100 100 63 100 100 By C 86 85 89 54 90 83 Self-identification By A 100 0 0 92 0 17 ByC 41 50 22 25 60 66 Phatic Utterances 12 71 89 4 80 83 Pre-closing 5 20 56 0 20 33 Closing By A 13 30 50 13 20 J•> J"> ByC 85 68 50 87 80 67 5.4 Different Types of Telephone Calls With regard to the distinction between interactional discourse and transactional discourse, evidence is found across both language groups in the following aspects: the J I 5 presence and distribution of phatic utterances and pre-closing, and the language choice tor statement of purpose In addition to commonalities, there are features that are language and culture specific In the Chinese language group, closing shows striking differences between the two types of calls In the English data, the most salient differences are in the identification sequence. 1 will first discuss characteristics of commonality that are evidenced in both Chinese and English. Features that are language and culture specific will follow 5.4.1 Shared Features The differences between interactional discourse and transactional discourse that are evidenced in both Chinese and English include phatic inquiries, pre-closing, initiation of closing, and the choice of language A. Phatic inquiries As the data show, phatic utterances constitute one of the major features that distinguish interactional discourse from transactional discourse The percentage distribution shows that phatic utterances are indispensable in an overwhelming majority of interactional calls prior to purpose statement (95% for CC and 89°b for A.A). On the contrary, in typical transactional calls, such phatic interaction is uncommon, and the occurrence of phatic interaction becomes marked In terms of percentage, in the Chinese CC data, there is simply absence of phatic interaction in T calls and in the English AA data, there is very little (10%). In those few transactional calls in English in which phatic interaction occurs, all the participants are acquainted before the conversation takes 3 1 6 place, and therefore, the occurrence of phatic inquiries is more contextually bound with the social relation factor It is interesting to note that for I-T calls, the occurrence of phatic utterances is at a middle point between the two ends; they are present in over half of the calls in Chinese (57%) and are present more than two-thirds of calls for English (7\°o). Such a pattern suggests that, with specific agenda to discuss, interlocutors sometimes proceed with the discussion of the main purpose without first being engaged in phatic exchanges. Moreover, such a phenomenon is actually more common in Chinese than in English, therefore presenting a challenge to the inaccurate characterization of Chinese discourse as invariably being "indirect." with "small talk" always leading the discussion of the main topic. Furthermore, the percentage distribution for phatic inquiries is spread out along a continuum among the different types of discourse, with T calls at the lower end, the 1 calls at the high end, and the 1-T calls in the middle but closer to the 1 calls (T: CC 0%, A.A. 10%; IT; CC 57%. A.A. 71° o; 1: CC 95° o. .A.A 89%. The pattern also lends support to the validity of identifying a mixed category of Interactional-Transactional discourse to be differentiated from the other two (Interactional or Transactional) B. Pre-closinii Pre-closing is another indicator of the differences between the I calls and the T calls In one-third (33%) of the I calls of the Chinese data, pre-closing is evidenced, and the percentage rises to more than half (56%) for the English I calls This pattern indicates that closing is not always accomplished in a linear fashion in interactional calls, nor might it be 3 I 7 desirable for discourse which emphasizes interaction. Interlocutors sometimes carrv' on conversations even though one party has expressed the intention to close the talk. For T calls, on the other hand, pre-closinu is rare. In the CC set, pre-closing is non existent while its occurrence in the English data is only minimal (6°o) Compared with the percentage in I calls (33°o for CC set and 56% for AA set), the difference is substantial In the case of I-T calls, pre-closing occurs only rarely in the Chinese data (5°b) and it occurs in less than one-third of I-T calls in English (29%) The difference in the percentage distribution of pre-closing among different types of calls is not a random phenomenon: it reflects difTerent functions of discourse as well as the role relationship between the participants. For interactional calls, the purpose is to socialize; callers and recipients express their concerns for each other, their appreciation and enjoyment of the conversation. Such a fijnction also permeates the process of closing Within such a context, the enthusiasm to continue the present conversation or the added- on topic may not be perceived as inappropriate, given that interactional talk usually takes place in an unhurried manner It may in fact index the density of the social relation between the two parties. For transactional calls, on the contrary, as the main purpose is business information exchange or transaction, the boundary of when to terminate the talk is easy to define and perceive by both sides. The achievement of closing is typically linear and brief Moreover, the role relation between the two parties is also reflected in pre-closing The occurrence of pre-closing may suggest either relatively equal status or a close social relation between the two parties in that the closing of conversation is being negotiated mutually. Such an interactional pattern indexes the relatively equal status between the two 3 I 8 parties. In contrast, in transactional calls, as the role relations between callers and recipients are usually clearly defined - customer versus service people, closing is initiated by customers. The service representatives or sales persons usually respond to customers" requests. Nevertheless, they do not initiate closings in most cases, nor do they carry on conversations if customers deem they are ready to terminate the calls Moreover, since most of the dyads in such contexts are unacquainted, there is little actual need for fijrther conversation if the caller has expressed the wish to close the conversation, let alone the introduction of a new topic This pattern of pre-closing is also consistent with the previous observation regarding phatic exchanges, indicating that there is substantial difference between the different functions of calls Presence of pre-closing is a strong feature of interactional calls, suggesting the close social distance and the interactive nature of the discourse. However, pre-closing hardly occurs in transactional calls Such a phenomenon reflects the fact that interactional pattern and discourse structure are constrained by the purpose and flmction of the discourse as well as the nature of the role relations of the participants. C. Initiation of closinu In addition to phatic inquiries and pre-closing, there are also distinctive features of closing which demonstrates differences between interactional telephone conversations and transactional telephone conversations regardless of the language. For T calls. Thank you in English and (in Chinese) "thank you' along with its variant forms are the prototypical means through which closing is initiated. For I calls or I- 3 1 9 T calls, on the other hand, expression of gratitude usually does not function as initiation of closing, even if thanking is pan of the closing. Rather, it conveys either party's appreciation of a favor performed by the interlocutor or of the calling. However, the actual initiation of closing takes a great variety of linguistic forms, for example. Til let you go. I'll see you tomorrow, or Til talk to you later In addition to the difference in linguistic forms, who initiates closing also patterns differently between I calls and T calls. For T calls, closings are mostly initiated by callers (100% for Chinese and 85% for English), suggesting that in such interaction, the right to terminate the call is assumed to belong to callers, given the customer-service relation in such interactional context Such an assumption, however, may not be made to the same extent as it is in I calls or I-T calls. In I calls, caller-initiated closing drops substantially (53% for Chinese and 50° o for English) The percentage is even lower in I-T calls (45'' o in Chinese and 39° o in English) The interaction pattern for initiating closing is interesting: it shows that there are actually unspoken rules native speakers follow in spite of the fact that they may not be aware of them. It seems that in either 1 calls or I-T calls, participants are engaged in on going interactions and who initiates closing is a matter of circumstantial needs, negotiation as well as collaboration, but there is no absolute pre-determined "ownership." On the other hand, in T calls, there is the understanding that callers own" initiation of closing. If a T call is terminated with recipient-initiated closing, it is always a marked case and is usually noticed by the caller Interlocutors are not consciously aware of the issue of initiation of closing, however In my interview with participants, when asked who is to initiate closing in different telephone conversations, most could not provide definitive answers, which lends support to the concept that sociolinuuistic behavior is often subconscious; native speakers may not be aware of the rules of interaction until we conduct research to formulate and codify' them, or we compare rules of other cultures with our own. Initiation of closing, therefore, exemplifies differences between interactional calls and transactional calls in two aspects: first, initiation of closing is realized in different linguistic forms in different types of calls: while it is Thanks which typically brings the conversation to closure in T calls, it is usually in other forms for I calls and 1-T calls. Furthermore, callers usually initiate closings in T calls, but not necessarily in I calls or I-T calls D. The choice of lan^uaue It is also found that the language choice for presenting statements of purpose varies between T calls and I-T calls ( I calls are not comparable in this respect because the purpose is primarily phatic) For T calls, purposes of calls are usually conveyed through expressions that are formal and distant. In Chinese, callers often soften the requests or minimize the imposition of the requests with expressions such as ii'/ "please." f'j^ "trouble you," and X'j" "excuse me." Similar cases have been observed in English: for statements of purpose, some commonly used expressions are I am calling to , I was wondering if , I wanted to ask you . .. or Can you tell me .. Choice of words tends to be more formal and requests are usually formulaic expressions 3 2 1 Participants who reside in China are aware of differences between the types of calls For calls to businesses or institutions, they point out, polite language and courteous expressions are desirable to build a good image of the caller, which is conductive for the achievement of the purposes of calling. For example, one of my participants states that she usually addresses recipients as Mr or Miss first. Other participants comment that the purposes should be explicitly articulated in precise and plain language In addition, the calls should be brief and terminate as soon as the main purposes are conveyed With friends or acquaintances, such choice of words for statement of purpose is inappropriate because they indicate apparent distance and formality between the interlocutors. Also, formulaic expressions to show courtesy at the beginning or end of the conversations will not be necessary. One can talk casually and discuss any topics as they come up during the course of conversations, and the conversations tend to be longer One participant specifically states that calls with friends are informal and relaxed. One can move onto the purpose directly after addressing the recipient and end the talk with |ij' "Bye " Similar findings have been evidenced in English. With regard to the presentation of purpose, I-T calls do not demonstrate the same language choice. The most commonly used expressions for T calls such as I am calling, or I was wondering do not occur in I-T calls, for example Furthermore, there are more varieties of ways of presenting one's purposes. One of the most commonly encountered word is just as in I just wanted to . .. There are not many expressions or structures which are shared by all callers; individuals show more varieties of language choice in conversations in 1 calls or I-T calls depending on 3 2 2 contextual factors including social distance, role relations between the interlocutors, and the nature of calls. 5.4.2 Language Specific Features A. Interactional patterns in closinu The comparison between interactional discourse and transactional discourse has shown differences common to both languages, but also features that are language-specific In the Chinese data, we have observed significant differences in the interactional behavior, especially in closing, demonstrated by recipients for the different types of calls In the English data, such difference between interactional discourse and transactional discourse is displayed primarily in initial greeting to summons. In the T calls recorded in China, the interactional pattern of the recipients suggests a lower level of warmth and enthusiasm as revealed through the lack of reciprocal exchange from the recipients in closing, and the consequent absence of a leave-takinu sequence This is in sharp contrast with the equal participation of both callers and recipients in both I calls and I-T calls in Chinese In the forty-two I calls and 1-T calls made by Chinese participants to acquaintances, friends or relatives, leave-taking is never absent and there is not even one case of a non-reciprocal closing exchange Reciprocal leave-taking exchange is thus the norm for closing in Chinese telephone conversations in general. Its absence in a majority of the T calls is marked. Such findings are not surprising for my Chinese participants because the lack of warmth of the serv ice people in stores towards customers is what they have all encountered personally many times before. 3 2 3 B. IdentiFication sequence For the English data, what is salient is the identification sequence In the AA set of English T calls, self-identification is provided for in the first turn, and therefore the initial answer usually consists of either both greeting and self-identification or self-identification For I calls or I-T calls, on the other hand, there usually is no identification provided for in the first turn Therefore, affirming recipients" identity is realized through greeting or addressing conducted by callers. To sum up, commonalities across the two languages with regard to the differences between interactional discourse and transactional discourse include the presence and distribution of phatic utterances, the presence and distribution of pre-closings, forms and "ownership' of initiation of closing, and choice of language There are also differences between types of discourse that are culture specific, namely, the non-reciprocal interaction pattern for closing in the T calls for Chinese, and the recipients' self-identification sequence in T calls for English. These two phenomena are in fact interrelated: they reflect the different values, principles, and practices of the business world in the two societies. In the U.S., businesses do their utmost to compete for and provide for customers, recipient self-identification mirroring such a principle. In the Chinese society, customers do not receive as satisfactory services as they desire due to the lack of competition among businesses, and to the lack of incentives for providing good services; the non-reciprocal exchange in closings reflects this social reality 3 2 4 CHAPTER 6: CONCLL SION 6.1 Summary of Findings This study intends to examine similarities and differences (1) between Chinese and English telephone conversations. (2) between interactional and transactional talk. (3) between telephone conversations in Chinese conducted by native speakers in mainland China with those conducted by native speakers residing in the U S . and (4) between telephone con\ ersations in English conducted by native speakers and by non-native speakers whose native language is Chinese. The investigation of the comparison across languages and cultures shows similarities as well as differences Similarities between Chinese and English telephone conversations are observed in the following aspects: first, for interactional calls in both languages, statements of purpose almost always follow phatic exchanges. Secondly, in both languages, closing sections consist of initiation of closing and leave-taking while pre-closing occurs predominantly in 1 or l-T calls Thirdly, for I calls or I-T calls, phatic exchanges otten take place prior to termination of telephone conversations. Differences across the two languages and cultures are evidenced in caller identification frequency, the manner of caller's greeting, content and distribution of phatic talk, sequences of identification and phatic inquiries, closing expressions, and leave-taking. Caller identification e.xemplifies one of the most salient differences in frequency and pattern across the two cultures. For both T calls and l-T calls, the percentage of caller self-identification for the .Americans is much higher than for the Chinese. Furthermore, the 3 2 5 data provide ample evidence that voice recognition is strongly preferred over self- identification Some callers will provide a voice sample repeatedly to encourage voice recognition and only identity themselves if such attempts fail. Moreover. Chinese callers sometimes invite recipients to guess at their identity rather than self-identitying themselves, a phenomenon not observed in comparable native English data. It suggests that in Chinese telephone calls, recipients do not view this guessing game' as imposing or inappropriate. Such an interactive process of establishing one's identity may both constitute and reinforce rapport building. While greeting in English telephone conversations often takes the forms of Hi or Hello, addressing the other party seems to be more typical and essential in Chinese except between unacquainted persons or intimate relations. The lower percentage of greeting in the Chinese data reflects the difference in linguistic forms for greeting in the two languages. While greetings in English such as Hi and Hello are fairly standard and applicable in almost all types of calls, greetings in Chinese seem to be largely constrained by contextual factors such as relation, distance, and type of calls Phatic utterances prior to discussion of purpose further demonstrate differences across the two cultures with regard to forms, themes, and frequency While How are you and How are you doing constitute typical and fairly routinized phatic expressions in English which can be used on almost all occasions, in Chinese, there are a variety of linguistic forms for phatic inquiries depending on familiarity and relation between the two parties and the time of calling. Possible themes for phatic talk include comments on one's ability (or inability in few cases) at voice recognition, either party's well-being, the here- 3 2 6 and-now activity the recipient is engaged in, or the lack of (or unsuccessfijl) contact. Compared with English, such talk may not contain explicit wording that verbalizes phatic expressions as How are you in English does. Nevertheless, it is the content of the comments or inquiries that communicates the phatic message One of the significant findings regarding differences across the two languages is that the core opening sequences which are deemed universal are sometimes violated in Chinese Hopper (1992) states that mutual recognition displays are the first-next-business in-and- after summoning/answering with the initial inquiry concluding the opening. Yet, in some of the Chinese telephone conversations, phatic inquiries are followed by caller identification, not vice versa. Furthermore, phatic inquiries are in fact responded to before caller identification is achieved The data suggest that caller's identity may not always need to be established sequentially prior to the interaction; identification/recognition may be achieved through the ongoing conv ersation. In addition, contrary- to the prevalent perception of Chinese people always being indirect' in discourse, the lower occurrence of phatic utterances in Chinese l-T calls than in English provides empirical evidence that Chinese speakers are actually more direct than Americans in discourse when they have specific agenda for making telephone calls. In those contexts, phatic utterances are sometimes lett out or exchanged after the main topic is discussed. Closings of telephone conversations are often achieved through different forms in the two languages. Forms for closing in English frequently address one of the phatic themes such as appreciation of calling and reference to ftjture contact, as in Thanks for calling or 3 2 7 Talk to you later. Prototypical expressions for initiation of closing in Chinese seem to be more matter-of-fact. Forms such as "So much fornovv'or yijfl'j&fl "That's it' are most common, without seemingly phatic meanings attached. Lastly, significant differences are observed across the two languages in leave-taking English terminal exchange occurs only in terminal position of conversations, typically consisting of two turns. Chinese leave-taking, however, demonstrates substantial difference in this respect. It often involves multi-turn sequence in calls between friends or acquainted persons, therefore not serving as terminal exchange only, but frequently occurring as the initiation, or in the middle, of a leave-taking section Comparisons across different types of telephone calls (interactional, transactional and Interactional-Transactional) have rendered the most salient differences. Differences between interactional and transactional calls exemplified in both languages are evidenced in the unfailing presence of phatic utterances in I calls in contrast with the absence of phatic exchanges in an overwhelming number of T calls, in the presence of pre-closing in I calls and I-T calls, in the high proportion of caller-initiated closings in T calls, and in the formal and distant language choices for statements of purpose in T calls In addition, there are characteristics that demonstrate the different types of calls within each language but not shared across cultures. In the Chinese language group, closing shows salient differences between the different types of calls: while I calls and I-T calls often consist of multi-sequence exchanges for leave-taking, a majority of the T calls either feature one-turn leave-taking or the absence of any In the English data, the most salient difference is in the identification sequence. For T calls in the English data, recipient 3 2 8 identification (with or without ureeting) occurs as the answer to the summons For I calls and I-T calls, it is Hello which functions as the nearly exclusive form of answer to summons The examination of setting (comparing telephone conversations in Chinese by native speakers in China with those by nati\ e speakers in the US) has presented differences in the following aspects: greeting (by recipients) and closing for T calls, callers" greeting, leave-taking, and code-switching The first difi^erence lies in the way initial greetings to summons (for T calls) are presented. For calls recorded in China, only a marginal percentage features recipient-identification. Initial greetings from businesses in the L'.S , however, show a sharp contrast in that all of the recipients from business/institutions/services unfailingly proffer self-identification on behalf of the places they work for Besides initial greeting, there is a sharp contrast in closing patterns across the two settings. In T calls recorded in China, non-reciprocal exchange in closing is not an unmarked phenomenon, in fact, in the majority of the T calls, there is lack of response from recipients either for initiation of closing or leave-taking. In the CA set of data, there is no parallel of such non-reciprocal interaction. Recipients show a similar level of enthusiasm for participation in the conversation, if not more. Moreover, there is an equal distribution between callers and recipients for leave-taking initiation. Compared with the CC set of data, the CA data in addition show some increase in callers' greeting . which may indicate the influence of English greeting (L2) on the use of greeting in Chinese telephone conversations by these native speakers of Chinese. 3 2 9 The most salient feature that distinguishes CA calls From the CC calls is code- switching, particularly code-switching for leave-taking Over eighty percent of the total calls in the CA set of data end in English leave-taking from both parties regardless of the types of calls. Some of the calls feature mixed-codes for leave-taking, that is. one party uses Chinese while the other party does leave-taking in English The prevalent occurrence of English leave-taking in Chinese telephone conversations demonstrates one effect of L2 on LI in a contact language environment Comparisons between telephone conversations in English conducted by native speakers of American English and by native speakers of Chinese indicate that non-native speakers demonstrate acquisition of the basic discourse structures in English for opening and closing telephone conversations. Generally speaking, they are acquainted with the typical linguistic expressions for conducting telephone calls in spite of the variation of levels of linguistic proficiency in English among the participants. All the calls initiated by non-native speakers are successful in that the intended goals are accomplished. Nevertheless, there are also observ ed differences in the language of the non-native speakers from that of the native speakers, some of which illustrate difficulties and misunderstanding in communication as well as potentials for miscommunication Specifically, differences are exhibited in greeting, caller-identification, and closing, and in the distinction between the language used for formal and informal register The data show that some non-native speakers often greet their recipients with Hello after recipients" greetings are extended, whereas native speakers use Hi most of the time Furthermore, non-native speakers identify themselves less often when conducting T calls 3 3 (> In I calls or I-T calls, non-native speakers may ask the recipient to speculate on their identity, a discourse style of the native language which might make some of their American interlocutors uncomfortable Non-native speakers may occasionally make phatic inquiries prior to self-identification, a phenomenon we have not observed in the English data in the same way It is also show n that non-native speakers may not always be aware of the distinction between language used for formal and informal registers and its eflFect on the social distance between the interlocutors. Therefore, in calls to friends, non-native speakers may use very polite expressions which are in fact appropriate for formal register but, when used with friends, may widen the social distance between the caller and the recipient unintentionally. Furthermore, compared with native speakers, when conducting phatic talks for closing, non-native speakers feel a lack of expressions and appropriate responses. As for the interplay between native and second language, the study has presented evidence of both the influence of the first language on the second language and the influence of the second language on the first. The former is primarily demonstrated in discourse pragmatics while the latter is exemplified in using L2 linguistic expressions and in code-switching. From a pedagogical perspective, the data suggest that instructions and classroom practice with regard to what native speakers do in English telephone conversations might benefit the learners. Therefore, instructional assistance can be beneficial. 3 3 I 6.2 Significance This comparative study of telephone conversations across languages and fijnctions has provided us with linguistic and sociolinguistic descriptions of how native speakers of Chinese and native speakers of English conduct different types of telephone calls in their native languages It is significant that, examining telephone calls as communicative events , the study reaches beyond the opening sequences, describing and analyzing contents as well as structures of telephone conversations of different types in both cultures. The study has enriched the study of telephone conversation studies across different languages and cultures by providing evidence of both similarities and differences between Chinese and English. As one of the goals of this study is to examine the validity of the distinction between interactional versus transactional talk, this study has accomplished its objective with solid evidence for such a distinction within the context of telephone conversations. However. this is only the beginning in this direction. Further research in various discourse forms and channels, and in different cultures, vsill continue to explore such a distinction and its impact on human interaction For second language researchers and language educators, the study has offered some insights on the linguistic performance, sociolinguistic behavior, and discourse pragmatics of second language speakers It supports previous studies regarding the relation between language proficiency and pragmatic competence, fijnher demonstrating that they are not necessarily developed in a parallel manner From a pedagogical perspective, this research 3 3 2 suggests that material development and classroom instruction on telephone conversation have important roles to play, for both learners of English and learners of Chinese. There are many questions awaiting empirical research regarding the interplay between LI and L2 in discourse for example, what aspects are more likely to be affected by L1 in the use of L2 or by L2 in the use of LI, and what aspects tend to remain unaltered, whether there is a directionality of the influence and if so, how, whether there are two pragmatic systems operativ e or a hybrid system for bilinguals, whether bilinguals manifest a hybrid conversational style, and. if so, whether such a style occurs regardless of the language used or there are contextual factors that might trigger it This study is inspired by research on studies on language and culture, cross-culture communication, telephone conversations, and second language acquisition and teaching I hope what has been presented here will lead to more comparative studies across languages and cultures as well as studies on the interplay between first and second language. Research in this direction will benefit and inform not only fields of scholarly interests such as language, culture, communication, and second/foreign language education but the general public as well which li\ es in a global village with increasing needs for cross-culture communication. 3 3 3 APPENDIX A: TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTION C Caller A Answer/The party called [ Simultaneous talk e g. A; [Hi C: [How are you It indicates that A & C talk at the same time. •[[" or "[[[" stands for simultaneous talk as well, but I use them occasionally in my transcription when there are more than one instance of simultaneous talk in a segment of the conversation This way. it is easy to distinguish different instances of simultaneous talk. // Oerlapped talk e g A: Thank you//Bye-bye C: Bye-bye Here, A"s bye-bye overlapped with C's Bye-bye. Similarly. "IIT is used to differentiate different instances of overlaps. = Latch No apparent pause between two utterances e.g. C wake you up= .A.. =no problem A's "No problem" follows C"s last word "up"" without perceivable pause :: Stretched sound: the more dots, the longer the sound e g oh::: (?) Utterances not being able to be determined: the more question marks in the parenthesis, the longer the utterance e.g. Can I help you'^'" Here, there are some utterances that precede "Can I help you." But they can not be transcribed due to the unclear quality of the tape or the rapid speed of the talk. -> A symbol for indicating focus of analysis OP openings PH phatic utterances SP statement of purpose PC pre-closing IC initiation of closing TE terminal exchange * This is based on Gail JetTerson with modifications to meet the needs of this study 3 3 4 APPENDIX B: CODING PRINCIPLES Greeting by A It includes A's initial answer such as . 'Hello' or May 1 help you!" Thank you for calling ... is also considered a greeting in addition to self-identification. As there are in some cases two openings for one call, only the second opening in which the caller talked to the intended recipient is counted to exclude other more extraneous variables. Greeting by C It includes C"s utterances such as Hi, Hello, Yes, or Excuse me in English, or I'li, and f/jU/- (or ll[fiin few cases) in Chinese Acknowledgment It refers to A's utterances in various forms such as Hi, '1^. and l'^" which are in reply to the greeting. Aflirming A's ID by C This refers to either assertive address or "try-marked" address (ScheglotT, 1979) with interrogative intonation contour It also includes forms such as Is this Susan'^ But inquiries such as Is Susan there"!* or requests such as Can I speak to Susan'^ are not counted in for this categorv' Caller self-identification Since only the second opening is analyzed in calls with two openings, calls in which the caller's identity is revealed in the first opening is subtracted from the total percentage In other words, these calls are excluded from the tabulation of either the total percentage of the calls or the occurrence/nonoccurrence percentage in the present analysis. Phatic Utterances for Opening Phatic utterances in English calls consist of expressions such as How are you or How are you doing. However, phatic utterances cover a wide range of linguistic forms for calls in Chinese. For example, ih'^ {\\ "What are you doing'!'" hi "So you're back"!*' 'Who do you think I am'!'" and MiJ "Nobody was home just now''' Judging from the perspective of a native speaker of American English, it might be dubious if these expressions can be considered as phatic. Nevertheless, from a Chinese perspective, these expressions do serve a phatic Rinction for interaction as will be explicated in more detail in the analyses. Pre-closing 3 3 5 The term pre-closina is borrowed from Schegloff & Sacks (1973) Yet it is given a new definition in this study which is substantially different from that used by the authors In the present analysis, the term is used to refer to utterances that are intended to bring the conversation to a close, yet unsuccessful, prior to Initiation of Closing (see below ), due to the introduction of a new topic or some other remarks that do not directly lead to closing of the talk. Initiation of Closing (IC) In order to code the data in such a way so that the linguistic forms can be compared and analyzed, an utterance, if it is coded, only belongs to one major category according to its primary function in the context: An utterance is coded as Initiation of Closing according to its structural position if it is perceived as the linguistic form that marks off the actual closing section. In other words, it is not the semantic meaning that determines what a particular utterance is (whether it is pre-closing, initiation of closing, or phatic). It is its function in the text that defines it. Therefore, for example, a Thank you can be either coded as initiation of closing if it initiates the actual closing section or as a phatic utterance if it is not in the structural position of IC. While many English expressions for closing conversations entail phatic themes, some most often used Chinese expressions for closing, for example, "So much for now,' are not. In order to make valid comparisons between the two language groups, phatic themes, therefore, if entailed in initiation of closings, will be disregarded if the utterance is coded as initiation of closing. Thus, an expression such as I'll see you tomorrow will not be considered as entailing a phatic theme if it is coded as the initiation of closing. Phatic Utterances for Closing Utterances that address one of the following themes are considered phatic: future contact, expression of gratitude, enjoyment of conversing with the addressee, good w ishes or regards to family A special note is necessar\' regarding the use of Thank you When used as a reply to phatic comments. Thank you will not be identified as a phatic expression, only a response For example, a Thank you in response to Have a good trip will not be considered as an expression of gratitude. Simultaneous Initiation (of either closing or leave-taking) It only refers to utterances of the specified linguistic content (Thank you or Bye) that either overlap or are produced simultaneously by both parties. However, if one party's Bye overlaps with the other party's Thank you, this is not coded as simultaneous leave-taking (nor closing) because only one party is doing leave-taking technically speaking. J J 6 APPENDIX C; TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR TRANSCRIPTS CC: T 337 CC: I 345 CC: I-T 362 AA: T 384 AA: I 391 AA; I-T 396 CA: T 403 CA; I 419 CA; 1-T 439 CAE; T 458 CAE; I 463 CAE; I-T 468 Note: The examples provided in the transcripts consist of a total of sixty-three calls of different types conducted by eighteen participants. 3 3 7 APPENDIX D: TRANSCRIPTS CC 1 # 8 OP A: f/j; llf. Il[!i ni hao vvei you well hello Good morning, hello C: 8 6 5 3 ba liu vvu san Eight six five three A: en n tVj ^. Ill [I liu van leave w ords To leave a message A; SP C; iiK it iii- k'!, Ili ft if; J' gao su ta shi ma majia de dian ling huai le tell him be mom house PT electriic bell bad SFP Tell him that the bell at Mom's house is not working. A: k"] 4'i '4' '|! ff-J ill n- J' ma ma jia li de dian ling huai le mom house PT electric bell bad SFP The bell at mom's house is not workinu. (at closing) A; =ii: fj- hai you ma still have Q =Anything else'^ 3 3 8 C: ji: ffe fl- ^ J-. qi ta mei shen me le other not what SFP No. that's about it. A: f/|; Ml: Inl-' ni gui xing you honor surname Your last name please'^ C; ^1-: ni. xing xu surname xu My last name is Xu A; a k n-" shuang ren xu double person xu Xu with "Double person" radical C: i't. dui Right A: ) C: kf hao good OK IC id-t iW xie xie thank thank Thank you 3 3 9 CC 2 # 12 OP A: Ui i}\- qing jiang please speak Can I help you'^ c: "iti, ii- M- ii: [x; ly/ rr m' wei shi bu shi xu hui qu ya fang suo a hello be not be name dbetrict dental clinic Q Yes Is this XuHui dental clinic'^ A: ae Yeah Yes. SP C; m m f'j^. iij f"] • K- xie xie ni qing wen yi xia thank you please ask once Excuse me. could you tell me f^j: fri U JL '4- '4'- ni men zhe er ya ke ba ya chi you PL here dental office extract teeth if you have appointments by specialists if fi {f '4c I'J IW you mei you zhuan jia men zhen a have not have specialist appointment Q for extractinu teeth'^ (at closing) C; I- r- I'M'' shang \vu ne morning SFP What about in the morning'^ A: 8 ba dian zhong eight point hour Eight o'clock. 3 4 (» IC C: lift, m m i'h 145c. o xie xie ni o Ok, thank you SFP Ok, thank you very much. A: 4^ % bu yao jing not matter No problem. c: o OK CC 3 #9 OP A: HIU wei Hello C: n'L /-fll. ei xiao jie hi little sister Hi, Miss SP C: -fii A!; 'h m -A ik k fit (\'i= wo shi mai xiao jing ling xi yi ji de I be buy little smart washer PT I am the one who bought the Little Smart washer A: =1^1^ ('i'\ Jii" ^ jit 7jc 'p,' ' j o ni jiu shi mai jin shui guan yu oh you just be buy in water hose and Oh. you are the one who wanted to buy the hoses W /ic -rr. x-1 pai shui guan dui ma dbecharge water hose right Q for the washer, right*^ C: lli^ ae Yes. (at closing) C: o OK. A; hao ma good Q [Ok-^ 3 4 2 C: [ll{- m. kf ft'j kf ft-J. hao de hao de hao de good PTgood PT good PT [All right, all right, all right ic m m f']: m xie xie ni o thank you SFP Thanks a lot. A: 'ii:- bu yao jing not matter No problem. c: m o OK. LT (If zai hui again meet Bye. 3 4 3 CC 5 #6 OP A: LC X chang xing long prosper Forever Prosper c; liji:. m '1' 'ii^ ei chang xing wei xiu zhong xin ma hi forever prosper maintain repair center Q Hi. Is this Forever Prosper Repair Center'^ A; m- ae Yes C: jA- )•'. wo shi ke hu 1 be client Tm a client. SP «l fn] fn] n. wo xiang wen wen kan I think ask ask see I would like to know fi- (h LC 'j^ K w> JL wo jia zhu zai chang nin \u hui qu na er my house live at Changnin Xuhui dbetrict there where we should go to find the repair service fi J 1< I'f '11 m .'ic' wo men yin gai qu na li zhao wei xiu dian I PL should go where find maintain repair point since we live in the area bordering both Changnin and Xuhui dbetrict. (at closing) A: 5 7 8 0 9 0 9 wu qi ba ling jiu ling jiu Five seven eight zero nine zero nine. 5 7 8 0 9 0 wu qi ba ling jiu ling jiu Five seven eight zero nine zero nine m. ae Yes. iif o hao OK good Ok, all right. iW. .xie \ie thank thank Thank vou 3 4 5 CC 1 # 3 OP A: 11^ wei Hello C: lim. wei he yue a hello name Q Hello Is this Yue He' A: 11^-. ei Yes. C: lllti. wei Hello A: -jli ?tl zhang qinu a name Q Is this Qing Zhang' C: l>^, ei Yes. PH f/j: //i.|: M kf- ni er duo ting hao you ear quite good You 11 are good at voice recognition= A: 11 f/j; k\-. ni hao you well // Hi. = m. ae = Yes 3 4 6 C: • m ill "/? Ml J'. yi ting Jiu ting chu iai le one Ibeten just hear out ASP You can tell easily A: m. ae Yes sp c: 11^- kf ijji 111 i,n r ei yo hao jiu mei tong dian hua le Intj good long not through phone ASP You know, we haven't talked for a long time (at closing) PC C: % {]• k flj- Iflf lll!l. na youji hui zai mian tan ba then have chance again face talk SFP Then we'll talk when we meet. A: \y&.// kf. ae hao yes good Ok. // all right. C: 11 k(- HE. hao ba OK SFP // OK m. 'T'- f>v 111 i'Jt W 0 dan wei dian hua mei bian o oh unit phone no change Q Oh, your work phone is the same, right'' (more on phone numbers) ic c: [w w/u- |t). m r na yi hou zai lian xi le then later again contact ASP [ Then we'll keep in touch. 3 4 7 A; W- k( hao hao good good fAll right. OK. C: [[4f hao good [[All right A: [[ LT C: [Ij- IAL //Ulij. zai jian a again see SFP Bye- //bye A; //ftj". !aL. zai jian again see //Bye. J 4 8 CC 2 # 10 OP A: wei Hello C: H H ma ma Mom. A: ii^r, ,rff X. ei jing w en yes name Yes Jingwen. PH C: 4'J ft'i NiJ i A-: I'J- 111 ill- m= ei ma ma gang cai zai da dian hua a yes mom just now CV hit phone Q Hi, mom. Were you calling just novvi* A: =MiJ KiJ m "[i M. gang gang min hua da dian hua lai just now name hit phone come = Minhuajust called. C: m o Oh. A: f^'j; ^j- J- i[i lA-ii'H ni da le dian hua gei ta shi ma you hit ASP phone to her be Q You called her, right"^ (They talked about Minhua's call and C's son's entrance exam to college.) SP C: m g 4'i a; lif H' na me ba majin tian hao ma then dad mom today well Q Then how are you both today"' 3 4 9 A: X: ifcC') jin tian man hao jin tian chi today quite well today eat We re fine today We had C: k fj- jin tian you xie leng today have some cold It's quite cold today (at closing) IC A: fj(i vJi l< ll(!l na jiu zhe yang ba then just thbe SFP So much for now then. C: fJ(i I'l!! na jiu zhe yang ba then just thbe SFP So much for now then. A: m m o o Ok. OK LT |l]. zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-bye C: yij ft'] f|- 111- i'i k'l bie de mei shen me zai hui ma ma other Pt not what again meet mom That's it. Bye. mom. A: |lj- zai hui again meet Bye 3 5 (» CC 3 8 OP I A: wei Hello C: li;r. A: ll'i? ei li xiao yun zai ma hi name at Q Hi. Is Xiaoyun Li there'!* A: f/j; IDji: f.V? ni na yi wei you which one CLS May I ask who is calling"^ c: w? n Jii- m i.'i 1^. a wo shi ta tong shi what I be her colleague Pardon'^ This be her colleague. ta zai ma she at Q Is she home"^ A; lift iqic o ni deng yi hui o OK you wait a minute. OK Hold on c: lift, m m f'j- o xie xie ni OK, thank you 0P2A; IIl!J. wei Hello. C: llj£ 3 5 1 ei xiao yun hi name Hi. Xiaoyun. A; ei Yes. wo xiao xu I little FN This is Xiao Xu. A; lijr. \w ei a hi Q Hi. Pardon"^ C; -f];- /Jv n-. Il!i if. wo xiao xu cai jing xiao xu I little FN finance economics little FN This is Xiao Xu. I work in the finance and economics office. A: lijT f/j: ki. 11^-. ei ei ni hao ei yes yes you well hi Yes, oh, hi PH [LC ijc \)l J' chang yuan bu jian le long far no see ASP [Haven't seen you for a long time. C: [f/j; ^j'. m, LC: lit J' ni hao ae chang yuan bu jian le you well yes long far no see ASP [Hi. Yes, haven't seen you for a while. 3 5 2 A; m. m. i^ij H i"i ;!<: ae mei peng dao guo ya hui lai yes not meet ASP SFP back Yeah. I haven't seen you since we returned C: 1,1 Ai- ij|^ jiu shijiang ya just be say SFP Yeah, that's right. A: kf II'H ni hao ma you well Q How are you doing' c: i'l ;!<: n f/i:. wo ye mei lai kan ni I too not come see you I didn't come to see you (More turns on A's busy work.) A: [\^'L m ei ni na neng la hi you how Q So, how are you doing ' SP C: li;^? ih:. mei sha wang wang ni not what regards you Just to call to say Hi. (at closing) ic C: K i^ij tiL Xc M /i" xia ci wo dao ji guan lai lai kan ni next time I to oftlce come come see you I will visit you next time when I go to the office. A: kf m. o hao de OK OK 3 5 3 C: iqii Hki o hao OK // OK A: //fii] /Jn rfi; k[. wen xiao dong hao ask name well Say hi to Xiao Dong. c: m. i''f n \¥ '1 .'li o ni zi ji shen ti dang xin dian OK you self health caretlil some OK, you take care of yourself A: kf kf tif hao hao hao OK OK OK C: kf ll'i= hao ma good Q Ok'^= A: xie xie o thank SFP =Thank you very much. C: iW f/i: iij^= o xie xie ni o ok thank you SFP. Ok, thank you ver\' much= LT A; =(i^ llj: zai hui zai hui again meet again meet =Bye-bye. C: m I'f o zai hui ok again meet Ok, bye. 3 5 4 A: fnj f/j; g g k(-. wen ni ba ba hao ask you father well Say Hi to your dad, c; m 4r- [m iW tw o hao de xie xie xie xie ok good PT thank thank Ok. all right [Thanks a lot. A; [flf llf 1?. zai hui zai hui again meet again meet [Bye-bye C; |i]- Iipj. zai hui a again meet SFP Bye-bye 3 5 5 CC 4 # 6 OPIA; wei Hello C: m iW l.'.1 '/J< ri- l"r? wei xie xie ni zhou yi hua zai ma hello thank you name at Q Hello Is Yihua Zhou there please'' A: m, {\- ri C: ll|ij? a Q Pardon!' 0P2A: lift wei Hello. C: 11U\ 'J^ 4X. ei xiao zhao hi little FN Hi, Xiao Zhao A: HlV ei Yes PH C: Ifjr, f/jc ('f-; llili- 'iit U"j^ ei ni zai shuijiaodui ma hi you DR sleep right Q Hi, were you taking a nap'^ 3 5 6 A: {f. mei you NEG No. C: Hip a Q Pardon'^ A: m. ii- ri-; tli 'w: m- ae wo shi zai shui jiao a yes I be DR sleep SFP Yes. I was C: 11^ m. fll! f'']: II'> m. Hi- o yo ba ni chao xing le Interj DOMP you disturb wake ASP Oh no. 1 woke you up A: //4^-jrr Vf I't^ bu da jie de no matter PT //No problem. (at closinu) PC C; a ]\- 'S.. ill: In] In] di- mei you shen me jiu shi wen wen hao not have what just be ask ask well Nothing else. 1 just called to see how you're doing. (more on details ofC's next visit to A s) PC C: 11^-. FT: I'M] ^ ijliJ F'L/: III'. o dai wen ni de li shi fli hao Ok on behalf ask you Pt FN master well All right. Say Hello to Master Li (.A's husband). 3 5 7 (more on details for C"s visit) c; {]• n. <• // -fj" 'li i'f fi'j wo you shu wo hui da dian hua gei ni de I have number I will hit phone to you PT I know, ril call you first. A; // (if- li"/' lift-. hao ma o good 0 Ok All right"!' Ok. c. m. Ill (]r o hao de OK OK A: kf {\r hao de OK IC C: li]- m. zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-bye. A: m. flj" 1: .7 W o zai hui a Ok again meet SFP OK. // Bye-bye C: // iij: 1: |if iij: zai hui zai hui zai hui again meet again meet again meet // Bye-bye. Bye-bye. A; [ |nl f/j: kf: In] f/j; (I J, lis 4j'. o wen ni mama hao wen ni men en li hua jun hao Ok ask you mother well ask you PL uh name well Ok. [ Say Hi to your mom and uh, Huajun Li 3 5 8 C: m f'j^ !•'> J' ba ni chao xing le hao hao hao DOM you disturb wake ASP good good good [Sorry to have waked you up I will, LT 1^^ m o hao zai hui o Ok good again meet SFP Ok. [[ bye-bye A; [[|i|- CC 6 # 2 OP A; n]!l wei Hello. C: m ^"0. yang min zhen FN name Minzhen Yang A; lij[- ei Yes PH C: (If X 4^ IAL J' hao jiu bujian le me good long no see ASP SFP Long time no see. A; a what Pardon' C: (If- X 4- i;i j'. hao jiu bu jian le good long no see ASP Long time no see. 3 6 0 A: m ae Yes sp C: f/j; hf- 11"/^ ni hao ma you well Q How are doing'^ (at closing) IC C: M ^ K na me jiu zhe yang then just this Then so much for now A: iqii. o Ok c: m o Ok A: m // f'j: "P'l xie \ie ni a thank you SFP Thanks //a lot. LT c: // iif. 1:. i5ii iW I - zai hui xie xie wo gan sha again meet thank I do what // Bye. What do you thank me for'j'= A: =llii[H lliifC^-) he he he (laughter) C: ilj- IW. zai hui a again meet SFP Bye-bye 3 6 1 A: hi- kf hi hao hao hao Ok Ok C: |fj- <• lij" A: kf hao good 1 will. C: \i\- iij: <• zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye A: llf 1? zai hui again meet Bye. 3 6 2 CC I # 1 A: llUi. wei Hello C; /J^ {fi wei xiao huang hello little FN Hello, Xiao Huang A: ei Yes C: 'jN ''At wo xiao zhang I little FN This is Cai Ying A: III. ihl (If .^V; ^ j-^ ei ni hao zen me le hi you well how ASP Oh. hi, what's up' SP C: ill- f'j: m 11^. jiang gei ni ting ya speak to you listen SFP You know what n I- i^l' 1'^ I>ii ill )nj ;!(: ill i,';. dao shi dian zhong o yo dian hua ju lai dian hua to ten o'clock intj phone bureau come phone The phone company called at about ten ur- m Ili • -KX^ jiang yao ba wo jia de dian hua xian huan yi huan say want DOM I home Pt phone line change one change and told us that our phone line would need to be replaced. 3 6 J A; m o Oh C: Iiq X I-. r a. ^ 'tl jiaojin tian shang wu zai jia li deng call today morning at home wait They told us to wait at home this morning. A: m o Ok C: w jl KA i}\- U llf I-. r- il.^1 (4^ J' na zhe yang wo jiang zhi hao shang wu diao xiu le then thbe way I say only good morning switch rest ASP So I have to take half a day off this morning. (at closing) A: kf kf kf hao hao hao good good good Ok . all right. IC //iitii 14^: jiu zhe yang o just this SFP //So much for now then. C: //!iitji n. jiu zhe yang just this //So much for now. A; lif hao Ok C: [jl]. iW f/j; m. zai hui xie \ie ni a again meet thank thank you SFP [Bye Thanks a lot zai hui again meet [Bye. '^1 'ii:- bu yao Jin bu yao jin not matter not matter No problem at all. m, I'f CC 2^11 OPIA: ll[i} wei Hello C: "It m m f'h 'b. it '1^ HH A-: ll'i? wei xie xie ni xiao shen xiao li zai ma hello thank you little name in Q Hi. Excuse me. is Xiaoli Shen there A; 11^. ni deng yi deng o you wait one wait SFP Hold on, OK' C; iJfli- 0 OK. 0P2A; wei Hello C "lli. 'J^ ;t wei xiao shen hello little FN Hello, Xiao Shen A; liji:. ei Yes PH C: J,J ('.}• Ill |]< J,!: ifi: IIT cai de chu wo shi shui ma guess PT out 1 be who Q Guess who this is. A: J,f ll'i. cai bu chu guess not out 1 can't J 6 6 C; iTA shu jinu name Jing Shu A: // f/j; iif. ei ni hao hi you well Oh, // hi C: //f^a/- 11^-, f/j; fh r- lltfE 'ijj; J' ni hao ya ni zai gan ma shui jiao le ma you well SFP you do Q sleep ASP Q //Hi, what are you doing'^ Were you sleeping ' ae Yeah= c: -m. J' m' a xiu xi le a what rest ASP Q =What, already"* A: a what Pardon'^ C: ilj] X r. V- i-JF. Il'i'' min tian shang zao ban ma tomorrow on morning shift Q Are you on morning shift tomorrow'^ A: fx U. m ilH. mei you wo bu fan ban NEG I no shift No, I don't work on different shifts. 3 6 7 c: liiii. fic Li m r m-' o ni yi jing shui le a oh you already sleep ASP Q Oh. but you already turned in. A: IIS en Uh hum. C: lift ll^J, >i'- ft'J 'i'- ft A: =i'^^ (ij- ni hao ni hao you well you vsell How are you'^ SP C: m & fi- Jji- tl i=iJ rt'J o yo mei shen me ya wo jiu shi xiang dao ni de qian oh not what SFP I just be think of you PT money Well, nothing else. I just thought of the money you left in my care • I'L ri: )L yf fl- Ill h; yi zhi zai wo zhe er deng shen me shi hou always I here wait what time and wonder if sometime later you would like to A: fl a iv you kong guo qu na have time over go bring go and get it when 1 have time. (at closinu) ic c: iif. i}\r m v- hao na na ni zao dian xiu xi ba good then then you early rest SFP All right, then, Pll let you go so that you can rest early 3 6 K A: iiii[ iiM[ (%) ifji m f'j; m. he he (laugh) xie xie ni o ha ha thank you SFP (laugh) Thank you very much. C: 'il- % fl'J.. bu yaojin de not matter PT No problem. LT fi]. m. zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-bye. A: 4r-. |i]- hao zai hui "ood at'ain meet Ok. bye. 3 6 9 CC 3 # 3 OP A: wei Hello C: l>^-. ei Hi A; Hi. ei Hi. c: m m" min hua a name Q Is that Minhua'^ A: VI. ei Yes. C; © ^ min hua wo yi qing name [ name Minhua. this is Yiqin. A: f'j\ 4j-. ei ni hao hi you well Oh, hi PH C: f/j; (t Hi -ii ni zai shui jiao ma you DR sleep Q Were you taking a nap'' J 7 (t A: m {]". '!r f: • M AV; 'fl' -ii:- if- 1- i:- J' Hang dian zhong yao kai hui qu le two point o'clock want open meeting go ASP The meeting is at two (Then C asked A to pass on some message to a friend of hers at the meeting) A: ft; !,t -ji- ni jiu zhe shi ma you just this matter Q Is that air^ SP C: ','j ^h. ft- ft; Ul- lin wai wo gen ni jiang ya besides I to you speak SFP No. You know. A: m ae Yeah. C: ft |"I i:- ft- g g ur- H I'. wo hui qu gen wo ba ba jiang guo le I back go with I dad speak over ASP I talked with my dad about it. A: ae Yeah. C: ji k ll-Ji fl (at closing) c: ii{- m ^•= hao de ya good PT SFP Ok= IC A: jiu zhe yang just this =So much tor now . C: // ki- f| A; //{] ft' -2^ ']l- tJ 'li ii^' f']^ you shen me shi wo da dian hua gei ni have what matter I hit phone to you // If there's anything, I will call you. C: k(- ft LT A; ///|f]- I:- H:-! zai hui a again meet SFP /// Bye-bye. C: jlj- zai hui o again meet Ok Bye-bye A; - t'f zai hui again meet = Bye. ill C: !l]- CC 4 # 1 OPIA: IlltJ wei Hello. C: ll[5i. wei Hello A: III. ei Yes c: jo!; «ii lijij? k W? shi shui a da ge ge a be who Q big brother Q Who is it'^ Is it Big Brother"^ A; 111". ^Ij ih: kf. ei li hua ni hao yes name you well Yes Hi, Lihua C: liji", f/j: (!]•-. ei ni hao Hi PH 172 itZ ji" fan chi guo ma meal eat ASP 0 Did you eat yet'l* A: liZH r chi guo le eat ASP Yes, we did. c: if^ ii r m-' chi guo le a eat ASP 0 So you did. 3 7 4 A; ae ae Yes. C: A; ill ll\[ (h ll'i? da jiejie zai ma big sbeter at Q Is Big Sister in'' A: ;!<: f/j: /]• • K wo lai bang ni kan yi xia I come help you look once Let me see. C: llf. m m ('Iv hao xie xie ni OK. Thank you 0P2A: 111(1 vvei Hello C: k ll\[ 411 da jie jie Big Sister A: ae li hua yes name Yes. Lihua. PH C: f/j; '01 nZ ]' ni fan chi le ma you meal eat ASP Q Did you eat yet'^ A. m It ;i" r wo fan chi guo le I meal eat ASP ASP I did. J 7 5 C; IfZ H J' lli'j-' chi guo le a eat ASP ASP Q You did A: ae Yeah. SP C: I'l". ft: ij(: ei wo gen ni jiang ya hi I to you say SFP Hi, let me ask you, ?,'/ li ('r^ iJi: t ^ j"^ jie guo ni na ge cai vvu zen yang le finally ni that CLS account how ASP how did you manage with the account fmally'^ (at closinu) ic c; k{ {\'j. ft; n d (4^ -1 /•;. o hao de ni zi ji shen ti dang xin dian Ok good PT you self health carefiji some Ok, all right, you take care of yourself. A: // o // OK C: 11 yij i\'\ f|- ^ /// bie de mei shen me ba others PT not what Q 11 That's it. /// right'^ A: /// |Mj k M H-k liH wen da a yi hao ask big aunt well /// Say Hi to Big Aunt for me= 3 7 6 C: (if kf m- o hao de hao de Ok good PT good PT = Ok."! will= A: =m m 11^= xie xie o thank SFP = Thanks for calling.= C: =4^ % fl'J, ^ //ff'J. buyaojin de bu da jie de not matter PT not connect PT = Dont' mention it. That's // nothing. A; // m iW xie xie thank 11 Thank you. C: {]• fl- ^ -Ji: ji]- you shen me shi zai da lai have what matter again hit come If there's anything else, just give me a call. A; ki ft'j. k\ ft^. o hao de hao de Ok good PT good PT Ok.l will. LT C: |lj- !l]' zai hui zai hui again meet again meet Bye-bye A; (If zai hui again meet Bye. ill cc 5 # 2 OP A: wei Hello C: ll[^. k'lj <-j- ll'i^ wei ma ma dui ma hello mom right Q Hello. Mom'^ A; 11^. ft; ii!: m" ei ni shi shui yes you are who Yes. Who is this'^ C: wo xiao yang I little FN ^ It's me, Xiao Yang. A: \i'l. ei Hi. C: A: li][. ei Yes. SP c: /j^ 4^ m A- i^'j i'b a Ji M xiao mei xian zai dao ni zhe er lai ma little sbeter now to you here come Q Does Xiao Mei come to your place these days'* A; ^ fL H A rf C: fL f-f- /\- Hi- W yao li bai liu zai lai a want Saturday again come Q Oh, not until Saturday :* A: m ae No. C; (ffe I11!1. I-. Ut-, £ & -ii:- f"! • ft- 1\. ta ba shang ci jiang mao mao yao wen yi jian shi she last time say name want ask one CLS matter She told me last time that Vlaomao wanted to ask about something (at closing) C: ll(- rt A: kf hao ma good Q OK'^ C: kf {\r hao de good PT Ok A: It All right PC C: |ij- zai hui a ai^ain meet SFP Bye. 3 7 9 A; ffr lin lin hao ma name well Q How is Linlin :* c: m kf m. man hao de quite well PT She is fine. A: m. o OK c: m. ae Yeah A: lift-. o All right C: ^ yao kao shi le jiu shi will exam ASP just be She will take exams soon, though. A: m. o Oh. c: m. ae Yeah. A: It. o Ok. 3 S (I C: llf [IT hao ma good Q All right'^ IC A: jiu zhe yang just this So much for now LT C: [Ij- Hiij. zai hui a again meet SFP Bye-bye. A; lijlc. o o Ok. Ok 3 8 1 CC 6#8 OP A; ll[^. wei Hello C:'rI r heI tsc xu chen lin FN name Chenlin Xu. A: V'l. ei Yes C: (XXXX) ni You A: lij[, HI W't [.ti ^ ei ei ei zen me yes yes yes how Yes, yes [what SP C: [lii,-fii nil k 'i'- I-- I-. Hi m. wo wo minu tian zao shang lai shang ban de I I tomorrow morning come on shift PT I. 1 am going to go to work tomorrow morning. (at closing) IC C: llf j' kf hao le hao ma good ASP good Q So much for now, OK"* A: lif fl'l hao de good PT Ok. 3 8 2 C: ffj K i>i' ijf- wo men xia ci zai jiang o I PL next time again say SFP We'll talk next time, OK= A: =ll{ (If //llf. hao hao hao good good good =Ok. 11 sure. C: 11 lljj k -lir i;- ///(XXX) wo ming tian dai qu gei peng hua I tomorrow bring go to name // ril bring it to work tomorrow and give it to Hua Peng III (XXX) A: /// o /// Ok. 4J- m ki m hao de hao de good PT good PT All right, all right. LT C: |f]. zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-b\e= A; =(if lii zai hui zai hui again meet again meet =Bye-bye c: ii(- ii'i'v/ m. hao ma o good Q Ok Ok-^ // 11 o // Ok. AA I # 20 OPIA: (Recorded message) In order to help you understand many water issues facing the community 0P2A: Thanks for holding so long. This is Dan How can I help you'^ C: Urn yes. May I speak with Brittany'' A: Brittany, sure C: //Uh hum A: /AVhat is your name'^ C; Betsy Wilson I spoke with her the other day, two days ago, I think A: Hold on. 0P3A: This is Brittany C: Um yes. Hello. Brittany. SP This is Betsy Wilson and 1 spoke with you two three days ago about high water bill we'd received and you put in a work order to have someone= A; =OhOk //Hold on, 1 got another customer C: //come out A: Can you hang on a minute"^ (at closing) PC C: OK. welf Thank you very much. (C asked another question about billing then) C: OK.//OK A; //OK'^ C: Well IC Thank you so much for your help ///on this, Brittany A: ///Oh, you're welcome C: OK //Sure appreciate it. A: //Ask for me and they'll transfer you when you get next bill C; OK A: OK'^ C: Great. A: All right. C: Thanks again 3 8 5 LT A: Bye-bye C: Bye-bye 3 8 6 AA 2tf\ OP A; Dept. of Cultural Studies C: Yes, urn, may I speak to Helen please. A; This is she. C: Hi. this is Jennifer Elmer calling. [\e talked to you before, um Tm doing independent study I still have not met with (The microphone fell off at thbe point so the sentence be not completed) C: I'm going to get that information to you as soon as possible A: Ok/' SP C: Um, I wanted to ask you a quick question. A: Uh hum C: I'm doing six units of, um, of independent study in.. (at closing) C: 7/Ok A: ///Uh hum C: Ok, great IC Thank you verv much. A: You're welcome LT C [Bye-bye A; [Bye J 8 7 AA 3 No. 22 OP A: J & J Portrait Studio C: Yes, this is Ellen Wayne. SP I'm calling to make an appointment. A: Ok. Um. on what day"* C: Tuesday the fifteenth. (at closing) A: Ok, so your appointment is Tuesday the fifteenth at four o'clock. C Yes= A: =0k-^ IC Thank you. C: Thank you LT A: Bye J S 8 AA 4 # 8 OP A; School of Early Education This is Laura. C. Hi, Laura. This is Julia A: Hi, Julia. C: I got your message. I didn't have a chance to call back yesterday afternoon SP Can you tell me when Dr. Stevenson is going to be in there'^ (at closing) C: //You know what A: //You didn't see PC C; I got to run. A; All right. C: So are you going to be there tonight'^ (more talk about the party) PC C: You know what, I got to run cause I got to run (up'^) the door (more talk about jobs) A Ok C: Really A: I, I will. C All right, IC thank you= A: =God bless you LT Bye. C: All right Bye 3 8 9 AA 5 # 12 OP A: Jones Hair Stylists May I help you'^ C: Yeah SP I wanted to make an appointment with Carol for a haircut, either um Thursday or Friday. A; Ok. Can you hold'^ C; Uh hum. A; Thanks (at closing) A; Ok. Janet I've put you at 2 o'clock and that's on Friday August 30 with Carol C: Ok, IC Thanks a lot= A: =Thank you for calling. LT C; Bye-bye. A; Bve 3 9 (» AA 6 # 14 OP 1 A: Thank you for calling Pets Center C: Yes. is this groomingl* A: Let me transfer you. C OK 0P2 A: This is grooming. How may 1 help you'!' C; Hi, this is uh Maurine Williams Uh I called yesterday and made an appointment to bring my dog in A: Uh hum SP C: for grooming and 1 can't remember if I am supposed to bring her in at 1 or 1:30. (at closing) A: OK, we'll put vou in for 8:30. C: OK A: //Thanks. C: //and, and then, with whom'' A: That's with Karen. C: Karen. She is the one that's supposed to do it today'^ A: No, that was Denbee C: Oh OK A: OK-^ C: OK. //Is she good too'^ A: //All right IC Thank you LT Bve-bve C: Bye. 3 9 1 AA 2 # 6 OP A: Hello C: Hey Mara A: Hi. C; This is Jenniffer A: Hello PH C: How are you'' A: I wondered what was happening to you too C; After what was happening to you guys. We haven't talked to you like, since we took. since we w ent on vacation= A; know i left a message there for you. C: You did'!* A: Yeah, just, I called, I think it might have been when you were in Spain C: You left a message on our machine'' A: Yes C: Urn, cause you know what happened was we had this guy who was taking care of our house and for some reason he decided to take our messages for us A bunch of our messages got A: //Oh;::; C: /AVe didn't have them when we got back. A: (swear word) SP C: Oh, how are you' A: I'm really glad. I've lots of news to tell you and I'm in the middle of everyone's arriving... (at closing) PC A; Well, Til give you a call next week and we'll figure out which night it's going to work (more talk suggesting a day to meet & asking for permission) PC A; So we'll talk next week then C: Ok A; like after your exam. And your whole program is going welP (more talk about C's program and family) IC A: Anyway, got to run= C: =0k. Enjoy your farewell party Congratulations! A; Thanks, Jenifter C; And let's talk next weekend. I'm glad to hear //to talk to you. A: //Ok"^ Tell Kent "Hi." C; Ok. LT A; Bye. Bye-bye 3 9 3 AA 3 #4 OP A: [Hello C: [Hello A; Hi. C: Hi. PH How are you"' A: 0;kay How are you'^ C: Are your. I'm fine. SP Are your visitors gone:* A; Kay and Richard left about half an hour ago C: oh.' (at closing) PC C: Well, have a wonderilil birthday (more talk about birthday.) PC C: Well, we'll try to call you on your birthday (more about presents ) C: Ok A: Ok IC Thanks for calling. C: Ok.//Talk to you later. A: //Give mv lo\ e to Dan and Bryan. C: Ok I will. LT A: Bye C: Bye-bye 3 9 4 AA 5 # 6 (ending not available) OP A: Hello. C: Hi. Helen A: Hi C: It'sJenet A: Hi. Jenet. PH C. How are you' A; Oh. fine. C: Good A: [Getting older, getting (X) All that junk, you know C: [ Pm sorry I wasn't here, (laugh) SP C: Yeah. I'm sorry I wasn't here the other day when you called A: Oh, that was //all right. C: //I don't know where, where I was actually But I've just been so busy lately, so I "m sorrv' I haven't had the time to call you yet 3 9 5 6 11 OP A: Hello C: Hi A: Hi. PH C: How are you doing"' A: OK SP C: How's your coW A: OK C: Sounds a little bit, well, kind of about the same. A: Yeah C: But that's good, hasn't got worse. A; Oh no. un un C. What do you feeling'^ Is it starting to go into your throat A: No. un un. C: No'^ A: No. C: OK. So Mark brought you the chairs. A: Yeah (at closing) PC C: OK. vvelf I vvill:er talk to you soon. I'm here for the next two days. I go back on next Thursday. (more talk about their own schedules) C: All right. Well." IC You take care A: OK C: Talk to you later LT Bye-bye 3 9 6 I # 14 OP A; Hello C: Hi. It's me. I forgot something A: Oh //yeah C; //Sure enough. SP Um Nick wanted me to be sure uh: to ask you when would it be a good time for him to call you uh; during a late afternoon time. He was originally saying this w eek but if you and Peggy are going to be gone for the fair, that probably won't work. There's something he wants to talk to you about that I am not meant to know about, uh: A: Oh: C: I think it relates to the fact that next month is Oct (at closing) C: All right then. I'll let him know and well, I guess I'm not supposed to ask any more questions on that (laugh) then. A: OK C: All right IC A: //Nighty-night C: //Thanks a lot Nighty-night LT Bye-bye 3 9 7 AA 2 # 16 OP A: South Branch. Nancy Sauter C: Hi, Nancy This is Jeniifer A: Hi. Jenifter PH r ve been thinking about you. C: You have !' A: (laugh) Yes, I ha\ e C: You have not A: This is a telepathic conversation. (laughter from both A and C.) So what's your //email address C: //I know you went to see Paco last night. A: I did. I went to (XX ) but I can't remember your email address now C: Oh. I can't remember yours either, (laughter) Was it uh:: Nancy:: //S'^ A: //S. Oh, it's really, I really miss you. We've got to go out. ///W'hy don't we go out some time. C: ///I know, we do Let's do SP Oh, you know what I wanted to tell y. one of the things I wanted to tell you today //is A: //Whaf^ C: that:: um: What did I want to tell you ///Oh. on Monday (at closing) PC A: Well, listen, my dear, thank you so much for the info. and take it easy (Then they joked about calling each other Dr.) PC A: =WelI. I'm so glad to hear from you. C: It's good to talk to you and thanks for chatting for so long (There is more talk about the library.) IC C: Ok, well, have a safe trip A; Oh, thanks JenifFer C: Then we'll talk to you // in the near Riture. A: //I'm glad you called Take care C: Talk to you later LT A: Bye-bye= C: =Bye. 3 9 8 AA 3 # 21 OP A: Hello. C: Hi, Marv A: Uh hum. C: Hi. It's Ellen. PH How are you'' A: Oh hi. Ok C: I, guess who I had lunch with today A: Pardon me'' C: Guess what, who I had lunch with today A: Who-^ C: Mindy A: Oh. no kidding. C: Yeah, we missed her birthday A; Oh: : C: It was last week //so A; //Oh C: I took her to lunch, we just, 1 had to go to the center anyway, so= A. =uh hum SP C: so but we were saying that, I couldn't remember if it was, if I had talked to you but I know I had talked to her about maybe trying to have lunch on the 18th, which be, I think I talked to you about it. (at closing) PC A: Well, I'd better get off the phone. (more talk about how A was doing) C; Good, have Rin. A: Yeah, thanks. IC C: Well, I'll let you go A; Yeah, Ok, well, thanks for calling. C; We, we look forward to seeing you and once I hear from Liz I'll let you guys know and u :m you know, you'll talk to Hayden about it. A: Yes sure. yeah. C; All righty. A; Sounds great. //Ok C; //Talk to vou later. A. Ok LT Bye. Ellen C: Bye-bye. 3 9 9 A.A 4# 5 OP 1 A: Morning S, Swansons" C: Hi This is Julia. Is Catherine there"^ A: Yes. hold on 0P2 A: Hello C; Hi A: Things aren't working, (laugh.) He almost said Savers C: (laugh) PH A: (laugh) How are you'^ C Imbk A: Yeah. C; I'm Ok. 1 went worked out. I felt really good A: Oh, good//for you. C: //(XX.) A: Where did you work out'^ C: D & S Fitness (more talk about what kind of facilities the fitness center ha\ e. what C was doing there, and A talked about her wanting to go there too when she had time ) A; Oh, good SP Would it be Ok if I ran down and type thaf^ C: Absolutely= A: =You don't care'^ C; No. A; Ok. C: No. I wanted to let you know. IC A; Ok. I'll get dressed quickly and then I'll ur be down in probably twenty minutes. C; Ok= A; =Is that Ok'!' C: Yes, that's fine. A: Ok. C: All right. LT A: Bye " C: Bye 4 I) 0 AA 5 # 17 OPIA Hello C Hello Is Cathy there please'^ A ril see. C Thank you 0P2A Hello C Hi, Cathy A Hi. PH How are you C I'm good How are vou"' A Ok " C Good //What's going on ' A // Yay. Not much. C Yeah. A I just got back home. I worked the overnight. C Ecch Were you gonna go to sleep'^ A In a little while. Yeah. C Ok A Yeah. What's new with you' SP C Well actually. I was just reading the paper. I was looking the one ad for me even just to see u hat would come up A: Uh hum C: and I wondered if vou ran across the ad for instructor in business communication (at closing) C. Good. A: Yeah. PC C; I think I'm going to get back to the paper and A: Yay, well thanks, thanks for calling. C: Yeah, yeah. Apply right away (more talk on the address for the application) C: Yeah. A: Ok, give me another call. C: Oukay. A: Say hi to vour mom. C: Ok. A: Ok IC C: See you//later. A //Say hi to Nathan C He's r''). A Ok C ril see you later= A =0k C OK. LT A //Bye-bye. C //Bye-bye. 4 0 2 AA 6 # 10 OP A; Hello C; Hi A: Hi. PH C: How are you doing"' A; OK= SP C: =I just want to let you know Uh Mark is going to drop off the chairs by. He is going to take Sean to violin and then he be going to come by and bring the chairs back and pick up as many as the three he can get into the car. (at closing) A: OK C OK A: I'll look for him. C; Okey dokey LT Bye-bye 4 0 3 CA 1 # 3 OP I A: (Recorded messaue) m f'j: -rr iiI i.n -t- i lu xie xie ni da dian hua gei MT zhonu wen fij wu bu thank you hit phone to name Chinese service section Thank you for calling MT Chinese serv ice 0P2A: lif. ^1; m. ni hao wo xing xu You well 1 surname Xu Good evening. My last name is Xu. ii'i fn] i[i fi'i JL qing wen dian hua hao ma ji hao please ask phone number what number May I have your phone number please'^ C: n 5 I 0 wo shi wu yi ling I be tlve one zero Five one zero A: uh hum C: 6 6 3 liu liu san six six three A; uh hum C: 7 2 19 qi er yi jiu seven two one nine A: OK. i,'/ |i.J ih-. "JI l]!\^ OK qing wen ni gui xing OK please ask you honor last name OK. May I have your last name please"* 4 0 4 C: 4'(; m. wo xing Zhen I surname Zhen My last name is Zhen. A: <]• (I- 12. •])•• tiY "J- Lu rn f/j; iM m you shen me shi qing ke yi bang ni fu wu de ne have what matter can help you serve PT Q What can I help you with"' SP C; m .il iij m f'j^ ("t • K oh wo jiu x'iang qing ma fan ni cha yi xia oh I just want please trouble you check once Would you please check for me 'IS. l' 't' k Wi m fLl ifi, zhong guo da lu de dian hua China mainland PT phone to mainland China, 'iJ!-. Jii- -ft!! Ill ifi 'J- fi'i yao jiu shi yao ba dian hua hao ma want just be want DOM phone number I'll need to give the number •ji; flJ- shi xian gei ni men in advance to you PL to vou first. M iri m t a ii'i'' ran hou cai xiang shou na ge you hui shi ma then only enjoy that CLS discount be Q and only after that can we use the discount, righf^ 4 0 5 (at closing) C: tif ff(j hao de good PT OK PC //mm f'l^ m xie xie ni a thank you SFP //Thanks a lot. A: //))^\- ili flj" m. f'J> • K. ling vvai wo zai ti xing ni yi xia in addition I again remind you once //There is one more thing that I'd like to remind you of (more discussion on rates) c: iii- m, fx ii: ii-f f'Ai ii]. m hao de fan zheng wo dao shi hou zai gen ni men lian xi good PT anyway I to time again with you PL contact OK. anyway, I will contact you then. A: kf hao de good PT OK c. ii((\r hao de good PT OK. A: //OK. C: //<(/• hao good 7/OK mm m 'H. xie xie ni a thank thank you SFP /// Thanks a lot. ///iw m f'j^ (XX) xie xie ni thank thank you /// Thank you ( XX) OK. [Bye-bye [Bye-bye. CA 2 # 17 OP A: m iW f'j^ IJ" 'li in VIT. xie xie ni da dian hua gei MT thank thank you hit phone to name Thank you for calling MT ii'f li'i '4Q m II 'y-' wo xing yu qing wen zhuan nei xianji hao I surname FN please ask transfer extension what number My last name is Yu. What extension please'^ C: iiw kf en ni hao en you well uh hi A; //f/j; ll(- ni hao you well //Hi. C: //^.liJi!:- iiA[ {v. {]• )IJ MT wo shi xian zai mei you yong MT I be now NEG use name I am not using MT right now A: ///Uh hum C: ///-fJ^- (t )il )'j wo xian zai yong ling wai yi ge gong si I now use another one CLS company /// I am using another company right now. SP fiij • K MT wo xiang wen yi xia MT 1 want ask once name I would like to know 4 (I K PI fi-: fi" fl <\ fl- ^ xianzaijiu shi you mei you shen me now just be have not have what if you have any promotion program j'J" i=ij '|' |i4 X. I^li tfU fr fll: promotion program da dao zhong guo da lu gen xiang gang promotion program hit to China mainland and Hong Kong promotion programs for calling mainland China and Hong Kong. ///ji ft'j zhe yang de this ^ PT ///This is why A: ///um: -fie fiJ (f. fi' 1" tr ffr -fJ' i'lj fr wo men xian zai you ge te jia da dao xiang gang I PL now have CLS special price hit to Hong Kong ///Uh: we have a special rate for Hong Kong right now (at closing) C: li|5 kf na hao that good All right then. PC i(!| 14^ xie xie nin o thank you SFP Thank you very much. A: (If. hao bu ke qi good not courteous All right. Don't mention it. {]• a )jii m r-i hai you mei you bie de wen ti still have not have other PT question Do you have other questions'^ (more talk on the purpose of call) 4 0 9 C: k{-, vX JiCffv hao jiu zhe yang good just this All right, that's it IC m i!^| ih^ xie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot. A: Ok kf OK hao OK good OK OK. LT C: 11 Bye-bye A: 11 m f'J^ f-ii 111 MT xie xie ni shi yong thank thank you use name // Thank you for using MT. Bye-bye. 4 I 0 CA 3ffl2 OP A: ,}?f 'j' i[i ii^' ^ I'J- xin yu chang tu dian hua gong si name long distance phone company Xin Yu Long Distance Telephone Company nin hao you well Good Evening. W |nl lli fi'J II qing wen ni dian hua hao ma ji hao please ask you phone number what May 1 have your telephone number please'^ C; lli i,!;. Bl (t (f. ffl dian hua wo \ian zai bu zai ni men xin yu phone 1 now not at you PL company Phone number, actually, right now I'm not with your company A: OK. {{ i\- ^ fnl OK you shen me wen li ne OK have what question Q OK How can I help you SP C: il fnj fnl J]: wo xiang wen wen kan I want ask ask see 1 would like to know M a. f'j; ff] hi- 'jY 1^1' xian zai ni men shi mei fen zhong now you PL be every minute your current rate ^J- i^i] 'I' k Ui da dao zhong guo da lu shi hit to China mainland be for calling mainland China = 4 1 1 (at closinu) A; m {'^ K h\ i'Jt ii 'I- m 'J^ iM m. xiao shou ren yuan mei you er shi si xiao shi de sale person NEG twenty-four hour PT We don't have around-the -clock service from sales representatives C: OK. A; dui Right. ic c: m m ('f m. xie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot A; '(= bu ke qi not courteous Don't mention it.= C: =Uh hum A; iW i%\. xie xie thank thank Thank you LT C: [Bye-bye A: [Bye-bye 4 1 2 CA 4 # 3 OP A: J&C. -Jli liLj itj J & C wo jiao nan \i name I call Nancy J&C This is Nancy il'i fn] (''i: {\'-i m l< ''I fli Iti 'I qing wen ni de di qu hao he dian hua hao ma please ask you PT area number and phone number May I have your area code and phone number please"^ C: 506- 318-5632. A; iW- I'i iCl: W xie xie uui .\ing a thank thank honored surname Q Thank you. What's your last name please' C; 4'f- AjJ. xing hu surname FN It's Hu A: iW id-i {]• fl- ^ 'ji: ti'r i>[ W W ilij f'j: fi'J xie xie you shen me shi qing ke yi bang zhu ni de ne thank thank have what matter can help you PT Q Thank you What can I help you with ' SP C: jji- ffJ m 111 U % iA- jiu shi wo men de dian hua hao xiang shi just be I PL PT phone seem be It's about, we switched to I-. il K iiJ i=iJ fiJ nJ ri'J shang yue xia xun zhuan dao ni men gong si de last month latter part switch to you PL company your company the latter part of last month. 4 I 3 A: OK C: ^'1 ll-f Z liiJ. f'J> ffl "J (\'i dang shi zhuan zhi qian ni men gong si de that time switch before you PL company PT Before we switched, one of the representatives • f>v fl: U yi wei dai biao shuo one CLS representative say told us that.. (at closing) A: ki- 4j''^ hao bu hao good not uood OK*^ C: kf fl^J hao de good OK PC m iw. xie xie thank thank Thank you m. 1=11 III i=IJ bill in, o wo dao shi shou dao bill hou o I by time receive bill after Oh, by the time I receive the bill. (ill 'U fl {)• i|l( i=iJ, 111" IJ- ili ll ru guo hai mei you shou dao wo zai da dian hua qu if still NEG receive I again hit phone go if I still have not received the credit, I'll call you again. A: Sure 4 I 4 C: lif. hao good OK. ic m m xie xie thank thank Thank you. A; <{/-, m iW ir III ii^- J&C. hao xie xie da dian hua gei J & C good thank thank hit phone to name OK. Thank you for calling J&C LT C; |t]. W. zai jian again see Bye. 4 1 5 CA 5 # 3 OP A; fll 1;l|. he yuan harmony garden China Garden. May 1 help you'^ C; Uh: Can I speak to. Mandarin'^ A: Yeah. C: 0K= A: =OK iiw. i,'| |i.l iHp f|- en qing wen ni yao .\ie shen me uh please ask you want some what What would you like to order'^ SP C: iJ15 fi.l • h\ nei ye wo xiang wen yi xia that CLS I want ask once I would like to know i'\-^ fiJ jJ[ ill. ^ 'i'- I- JL /A il- I'J'^ ni men zhe bian jiu shi zao shang ji dian kai men you PL this side just be morning what hour open door the time that you start in the morning. (at closiny) IC C: m 'il> lii 'Jl^ vJi m M J' o na na na jiu xie xie ni le oh then just thank thank you ASP Oh, all right, then, thanks a lot. 4 I 6 A: (l]\ 4^ 'fi-' ' 1= hao bu ke qi good not couneous All right Don't mention it.= C: A ^ H M 'fZ ran hou gai tian wo guo lai chi then change day I over come eat =And I'll come to your restaurant some other day A //OK C: //(ifll"/' hao ma good Q /7OK-^ LT A: Bye C: m m xie xie o thank thank SFP Thanks a lot. A: )tJ idt bu yong xie no use thank Don't mention it 4 I 7 CA 6 # 14 OP A: Northwest Travel. C; ('.w en dui bu qi uh sorrv' Uh excuse me. SP -fji Ui l'>I K m A ff A: m. W. fi- ^ it )} o cong shen me di fang oh from what place OK. The location of departure"^ C: m f lliL i^lj Jt cong nei ge luo shan ji dao bei jini's from that CLS Los Angelos to Beijing From Los Angelos to Beijing. (at closing) C; pq I'i ^ OK ki si bai hao four hundred good Four hundred OK IC iW xie xie a thank thank SFP Thanks a lot. <(/• hao good OK. OK Bye. 4 1 ') CA 1 #13 OP A: Hello C: Hello, -1^ ft:; (t H'i'" li jia zai ma name at Q Hello, is Jia Li there'' A; \^1. 1IP>P ei zhen hua a yes name Q Yes Is this Hua Zhen'!* C: \il. f/j: kf f/j: /if. ei ni hao ni hao yes you well you well Yes, hi. A: f/h kf ni hao you well Hi PH C: f/j: A-; tr: ft- ni zai mang shen me you CV busy w hat What have you been up to'^ iic liu M A: wo qian liang tian f before two days For the last two days. A: IM en uh uh hum 4 2 0 c: h' kl W 'd: ili i.n. Ifli A-: da guo Hang ci dian hua ni dou bu zai hit ASP two time phone you both not at I called you twice but you weren't in (at closing) ic c: 111", m, ^ iW. ei o li jia wo yes oh name I Yes Listen, Jia Li, I fj' K ("ii I'J you ren zai qiao men have person DR knock door Somebody is at the door A: //OK na jiu that then //OK. Then let's C; iriXW: f/j: m k f'j: I". J^F. fl'J iA- zhe yang ni \ing qi tian ni shang ban de shi ma this you Sunday you on shift PT be Q // Let's see. You would be at work on Sunday, righf^ A: i't /•I dui dui dui riuht right riuht Yes c: kf. m ii-iM, -fa (fJ tif m hao wo dao shi hou wo wo men zai peng tou OK I by time I I PL again meet OK. [. We'll meet then A; OK//fj OK xing OK //OK 4 2 I C: //4f- ki. w> Ijit iif hao hao na jiu zhe yang OK OK then just this // OK So much for now A: OK LT C: //Bye-bye A: //Bye. 4 2 2 CA2#12 OP A: Hello C: Hello, kang yue ma name Q Hello Is this Yue Kang'^ A: Hi. ei Yes PH C: IW, f/j; |"| M hei ni hui lai la hi you return Q Hi, so you are back A: |"I ;|(i j' hui lai le return ASP Yes, Tm, C: uii L;t- wojiu lai shi shi I just come tr\' try I'm just calling to see if you are back. ih-^ %i\ m ^ ilii ni zhi dao wo shi shui ma you know I be who Q Do you know who this is'^ A: 'b m li xiao li shi ma name be Q Isn't this Xiaoli Li"!* 4 2 3 C; f/j: li/r- 111 j'. ei ya ni ting chu lai le wow you hear out ASP Wow, you can recognize my voice. f|- ^ ll-j- [-1 M (\'} ni shen me shi hou hui lai de ya you what time return PT Q When did you come backl* (at closing) c m kf. " na hao then good OK then. IC iif kf (4: )1 Ulli. ni hao hao \iu \i ba you well rest SFP You take a good rest A: (XXX) |l]. m zai liao ba again chat SFP (XXX) We'll talk later. c: kf rt^j. -fii- {] v:. fij {]• C]- « hao de wo you kong wo men you kong zai lian xi all right 1 have time I PL have time again contact All right, I'll, we'll talk again when we have time. A; kf. hao good OK C; kf. hao good OK Bye-bye. Bye 4 2 5 CA 3#14 OP A: wei Hello C: W ll'i ma ma Mom A; ei Yes PH C: 11 lijli e yo 11 My goodness. C: lliiE wo shui ///1 slept. A; d'. jJC \\ C; Iii H >k J'. I'i ^T. J' shui guo tou le zhen yao ming wo ji si le sleep over ASP real killing I worry death ASP My goodness, I overslept. I was really worried. A: IW'IS en en Uh hum uh hum 4 2 6 (at closing) PC. A; m ^ III ii 4/- na me jiu zhe yang hao ma then just this good Q All right, so much for now, OK"^ C: kf hao good OK A; in- ]• ^ ^ J'. jiang le zhe me duo le speak ASP this much ASP We've talked so long (more talk about others in the family) IC A: jjC ff; //li[ll, jiu zhe yang ba just this SFP So much for now 11 OK'^ C: //IM. en /7Uh hum. A: ijc ///HI!!. jiu zhe yang ba just this SFP So much for now. ///OK"* C: o /// OK. A: n ft- -i'jL ft- ^ '\V. mei shen me mei shen me shi not what not what matter That's it Nothing else. 4 2 7 C: m o OK A: Uki-WV hao ma good Q it C: Hki- m. hao de good PT //OK. LT ///|lj'. lifli. zai hui o again meet SFP it! Bye-bye. C: ///liLlg g Jl-^. jiao ba ba dang xin xie tell dad careful some ///Ask Dad to take care. f'j: tH "1 'D// ni ye dang xin xie you also carefijl some You also // take care A: //(if (if- (if (if hao hao hao hao good good good good //0K,1 wiir C: In] H (If. wen a po hao ask grandma good Say hi to grandma. 4 2 8 A; |fj- 1- m. zai hui o again meet SFP Bye-bye c!';!! w // i''i w 4j'. (chao a po) wen a po hao (face grandma) ask grandma well (speaking to Grandma) // "Say Hi to Grandma." C: //(XX) li]. zai hui a^ain meet // (XX) Bye. A: i}\- j' jjc ^ I; J'. jiang le zhe me duo le speak ASP this much .ASP We've talked for so long. j'. iiit ii J', hao le jiu zhe yang le good .A.SP just this .ASP /// All right, so much for now C: ///(ij. zai agam meet again meet /// Bye-bye.' A; [|ij: 1^. zai hui again meet [Bye. C: [Itf :2- zai hui again meet [Bye \m en Uh hum. CA 4#1 OPl A: Hello C: Hi, v.] M iif fh ei zhou jian wen jie zai ma hi name name at Q Hi, Jian Zhou. Is Jie Wen at home'^ A. a Q Pardon!' C: fifl M- wen jie zai ma name at Q Is Jie Wen at home'^ (A then started to joke about C"s name ) OP2A: III llt PH C: tfli f/j; m ih'^ I J" ILL wo gen ni jiang wo gen ni da dian hua 1 to you speak 1 to you hit phone Listen. I've been trying to call you. f'J^ I'l. /I: tl I'V ni yi zhi shi mang yin you always be busy tone but your line was always busy. 4 3 1 (at closinu) IC C: m jk lllli. na jiu zhe yang ba than just this SFP So much for now then. II) J X' ll-l" "N i'f. wo ming tian zou shi lai jiao ni I tomorrow go time come call you I'll come for you tomorrow when I leave A (If- rt'j. hao de good PT OK M M FT: J'. xie xie ni le thank thank you ASP Thanks a lot. C: 'ii;- iW. bu yao xie not want thank You are welcome LT llj- iv zai hui again meet Bye A: kf. m iW iW iW. hao xie xie xie xie OK thank thank thank thank OK. Thank you Thank you. ilf OP A: Hello c: n; wang ting name Ting Wang. A; lil, f/j; kf. ei ni hao hi you well Hi ' PH C: ir J- ki JL r l[l da le hao ji ge dian hua make ASP good several CLS phone I called you several times f'j: ff] -4c 111 I'f. 4I-: IJ' I'ji". ni men jia dian hua zhen nan da ei you PL home phone real hard hit SFP It's really hard to reach you at home. A: A. mei ren no person No one is home C: {]• II.J'. Ii'i;, I-. A. you shi ei ji ben shang dou mei ren sometimes yes basically all no person Sometimes, yes, basically always, no one is home. 4 3 J (at closirm) PC c: iji; iif I& {^[i f/i; 111 na hao ba wo hui gen ni da dian hua then good SFP I will to you hit phone Ail right. I ll call you later. (more talk on visits to other friends") IC C; IJi: J'. na wo wo ding le then I I decide ASP As soon as I decide. K VI IN ID F'J: IT I[I I.!;- ding xia yi hou wo gei ni da dian hua decide later I to you hit phone I'll give you a call. A: kf rt C: kf ll'i'" hao ma good Q 6K'^ A: kW llf {\'l tlf. m 111^. hao hao de hao \ie ,\ie o good good. PT good thank thank SFP Ok. all riuht. // Thanks a lot. C: //WiiOt jl ff. najiu zhe yang then just this // So much for now LT A; ///|ij. !AL. zai jian again meet. ///Bye. ///||]" !AL. TIF- 'JI zai jian zai jian again see again see /// Bye. Bye. CA 6 #7 OP A; Hello C: Hello:; A; ilk • shui a who Q Who is it calling'^ c: j,:; ilk m" ni shuo wo shi shui a you say I be who Q Guess who this is A: „'|j' i!/^ xiao xiao a name Q Is this Xiao Xiao'^ C; -fie ii: ilk IW bu shi wo hai shi shui a not be I still be who Q Who else can it be'!* A: \i'L f/j; ky (/]: kf f/j; kf. ei ni hao ni hao ni hao hi you well you well you well Oh Hi PH C: U M I"' qi lai le up ASP So you're up. A: ({• llf 111 W. zai na Ii a ni at where Q you Where are you calling from'!' 4 3 6 c: k Ri m i^ij n in tai yang shai dao mei you sun shine on ASP Was there sunshine on your bed'' A: I- Hi. i\ if m "it. wo yao shang ban le hai shai ne I want on shift ASP still shine SFP I need to go to work. I can't sleep in. C: a. 'II 0 wo zai na zai jia li oh I at where at home Oh. Where am I calling from'^ I'm at home A: .f]- J', n !AL r wo kanjian le kanjian le 1 see ASP see ASP I saw it. I saw your phone number on the phone. C: /]- j-^ kanjian le see -ASP Did you'' A: m. ae Yes. 1 did SP C; nf m ;12. wo ke neng zou 1 probably go 1 will probably leave K K fL • /li •Kia .xia li bai er zou next next Tuesday go the Tuesday after the next. 4 J 7 (at closing) PC A: <1 'k- 11/^, r'f >12 r dui bu qi xiao xiao wo de zou le sorry name I have to go ASP Sorry, Xiao Xiao. I'm afraid I have to go C: M- m ;!:• 11^^. hao gan kuai zou o Ok quickly go SFP OK, be on your w ay A: I If- W.// I'i" 1^. zai jian zai jian again see again see Bye-bye.// Bye-bye. C: 'JN 'D .'.'X '41C xiao xin dian o careful some SFP Take care A: hf ei hao yes OK All right. C: k\- //^t f/,- ^ ||if hao gong xi ni fa cai good wish you prosperity OK. /AVish you prosperity A: //;li r 14^ zou le o go ASP SFP //I'm leaving now. 4 3 K a i)L n H{-- ei yo gong xi ni wan de hao wow wish you play good Wow, wish-you have a wonderful tiime on your trip. (more talk on what is worth wishing for) IC C; /(f. i' hao bu shuo le Ok not say ASP OK, that's it, A: OK C: tli >12 gan kuai zou ba quickly go SFP You need to go now LT A. Bye-bve. C: Bye 4 3 9 CAC 1 # 15 OP A; Hello C: Hello A; Hello C: ei Hi. PH //(/j; (w r- II' ni zai gan ma you at doing Q /AVhat are you doing'^ A: HWl. ei //Hi. ii; 'ii:- f'j^ IJ" 'U. "M. wo zheng yao gei ni da dian hua ne I just about to you hit phone SFP Hi. I was just about to call you. C; /// ei zen me hi how Hi. Ill what's up"^ SP A: ///^ii '-y i^ij {i n^J • 1- email, wo jin tian shou dao shi ling de yi ge email I today receive name PT one CLS email /// I received an email messge from Ling Shi today (at closing) (The caller's daughter was heard repeatedly calling her mother in the house.) C: kf i\ hao le 4 4 II good ASP Ok, ic m ^ na mejiu zhe yang then just this So much for now. A: kf kf. • OK. hao hao good good OK OK LT Bye-bye (C's daughter's crying again.) c: 11^ o yo wo oh I' Oh no, my ^ J' ta ji si le she w'orr\' death ASP daughter is desperate jiu zhe yang ba just this SFP //So much for now. A; //hf kf k(-. hao hao hao good good good 7/ok. ok. ^ C: ///Bye-bye. A: ///Bye-bye 4 4 I CA 2 #9 OP A; Hello C: III", l^^j; ei chenjinu hi name Hi. Jing Chen A: IIW en Yes. C: llf. ni hao you well Hi. A: f'j> kf. ni hao you well Hi. PH C: J- -}i{ i^ij f/j: j". zhong yu zhao dao ni le finally find you ASP A: liw en Uh hum C: f/j; I'l-: HZ i7l ni zai chi fan ne you DR eat meal Q ' Are you having dinner'^ A: '}'jt fj. n ii: A-: I'M. mei you wo zheng zai zuo ne NEG I just DR make SFP No, I am cooking. 4 4 2 c: m, ii: (h m "M. o ni zheng zai zuo ne oh you just DR make SFP Oh, you are cooking. SP A; f/j; H M'' ni yao bu yao guo lai you want not want over come Do you want to come over'^ <•1, • K Hi;. dui wo deng yi xia guo qu yes I wait one while over go Yes. I will m a few minutes /V "h .12 iii m" ni shuo ni ba dian ban zou shi a you say you eight point half go be Q Did you say that you would leave at 8:301' (at closinu) C: ki- {\'j " kf rt^ hao de hao de good PT good PT Ok Ok iL i; ii: nruih^. wo deng hui er qu huan gei ni 1 wait hile go return to you I'll go and return it to you //in a little while. A; //4f. hao good //OK IC C: [7j^ • K deng yi xia jian a wait one while see SFP [See you in a while. 4 4 3 A: <• JL H ;!<: deng hui er guo lai o wait while over come SFP [I'll see you in a while. LT C: Bye-bye. A: IIW en Uh hum. 4 4 4 CA 3 #4 OP A: Hello C: a- 1'^'-. hey wo ya hi' I SFP Hi. It s me. A; 11^. <(/•= ei ni hao hi you well Hi = C: =li;r ei =Hi A: liji: ei Hi. SP C: .11 fn] fi.] f/j;. wo \iang wen wen ni I want ask ask you I have a question for you. A: /nyj^ ae //Yes. C: //f/j: IX liu {Hi H presentation H 'I' iL ni yi qian zuo guc presentation jiao guo zhong wen ma you before do ASP presentation teach ASP Chinese Q //Have you done any presentations before teaching Chinese'' (at closing) C: Ii^i. f/j; HZ m I"i'^ o ni zai chi fan shi ma oh you DR eat meal be Q Oh, are you having dinner"^ 4 4 5 A; 11-2% {\, HZ. 171 ae zai chi fan yes DR eat meal Yes. we are. c: m. 0 Oh IC A; • K hf l"i*' deng yi xia hao ma wait one while good Q Can we talk later' • K -rr ii >!<: iif I'T wo deng yi xia da guo lai hao ma 1 wait one while hit over come good Q Can I call you back in a few minutes'' C: llf {]'•} hao de ya good PT SFP No problem. A: n JL n llf wo wo nu er wo yao guan hao ta I I daughter 1 want manage well her I need to. 1 need to see to it that my daughter II!! ill HZ J' ba fan chi le DOM meal eat .ASP finishes her meal C: I'W i; 'iT ^ I'l!!. e ni qu guan ta ba yes you go manage her SFP Sure. // Take care of her meal. 4 4 6 A; Ukm'^ hao ma good 0 11 OK'^ ^ JL/// ij- ii ')« wo deng yi hui er da guo lai o I wait one while hit over come Q I'll call back in a tew minutes, /// OK"^ C: ///IM. l"W en en ///Uh hum uh hum. LT //Bye A; //Bye-bye. 4 4 7 CA 4#2 OPIA; Hello. C: llji. ni] ei van ming ma hi name Q Hi. [s this Ming Yan!* A: f/j; k\-. ae ni hao Yes, hi C: ft; kf. XiJ {[•. ni hao liu qian zai ma you well name at Q Hi. Is Qian Liu home'^ A: A;. zai at Yes, she is. C: k(-. i,7 • K III ii^- llf ll'i'' hao qing ta jie yi \ia dian hua hao ma good please she answer once phone good Q Ok, could I talk to her'^ A: .;i^ ^ j'^ zen me le how ASP What's up'^ c: -fii m m i.';-. wo yao gen ta jiang hua I want to her speak I want to talk to her. A: 11^. 0 Oh 4 4 8 0P2C; 111" [xij ei liu qian hi name Hi, [Qian Liu A: [K" \{fK f'j: ki huangjing ni hao name you well [Jing Huang. Hi. PH ^ zen me yang how What's up'^ SPC: «i fnj fi.J f/j: • I'J i!|!- tiJ ;5ii wo xiang wen wen ni yi men ke de qing kuang I want ask ask you one CLS course PT situation I have a question for you about one course. (at closinu) A; iiw. f3Z Tl- '^1- {I ^ '?r n. en fan zheng ni yao shen me zi iiao Ok anyway you want vshat material OK. anyw ay, if you want any of the materials ft •»-. ft ni gei wo. jiangyishen wo gei ni you to me speak one sound I give you just let me know ['!! give it to you. C: ri9 hao de good OK A: iiw'C»- en Uh hum. 4 4 9 C: 4f-. hao good 6k IC i A: 4f j'. hao le good ASP OK. LT C; |tl" iAl' zai jian a^ain see Bye A: Bye-bye CA 5 # 5 OP A: Hello C; /jx xiao man name Xiao Man A; III:: ei Yes:: C: m wo ji ping I name This is Jiping PH A: \m. li/f Ml j' o wo ting chu lai le yes I hear out ASP Yes. I recognized your voice C: llff- ;ll ;f(:' J- M' ting chu lai le a hear out ASP Q Oh you did. A: li^r, ft; ki f'j; ll{- ei ni hao ni hao hi vou well vou well Hi " SP C: iJlJ t: A: X (4 i"IJ na gejin tian wo you peng dao that today 1 again run into You know, today I ran into 4 5 I ij|j t m m. na ge jing li a that CLS manager SFP that manager A: m en Uh hum C: in ftk iiiL. ftk !•[ fig iA 1- m /\' ran hou ta shuo ta ke neng zhe ge xing qi liu then he say he perhaps this CLS Saturday He said that he might be at the restaurant 1- (i. iJ!^ n til. hui zai nej ge can guan will at that CLS restaurant this Saturday lU liu fl'j Lotus Garden. jiu yi qian de Lotus Garden just before PT name It's called Lotus Garden before A: m \W xing qi -liu a Saturday Q Saturday'"" c- fj (i ni you mei you kong a you have not have time a Do you have time'!* (at closing) C: ki- " • hao ba good 0 OK'^ 4 5 2 A: kf. hao good OK IC C: m najiu zhe yang that just this So much for now A: kf= hao good 0K= C: =f1-; ihl J- m. zuo fan le o cook meal ASP SFP =1 need to cook now. OK"^ A: i!J| m f'l: m. xie xie ni o thank thank you SFP Thanks a lot C: '{'X ,X; f;. mei guan xi no matter No problem A; iW iW. xie xie thank thank Thank you. C: W> na ge That" 4 5 3 LT |if m.. zai jian a again sse SFP Bye-bye A: lif IAL// |I1- IAL fi'- zai jian zai jian ji ping again see again see name Bye-bye, Jiping C: //li). IAL. zai jian again see Bye 4 5 4 CA 6 #10 OPl A: Hello C: m-. i,'i fnj iJi; i- /Jn {\- ll'r ei qing wen nei ge xiao mei zai ma hi please ask that CLS name at Q Hi. Is Xiao Mei there please':* A: {\l • K- zai ni deng yi xia PP you wait one while Yes. Hold on a second. C: OK 0P2A: Hello c: f/j: infc j"^ ei ni shui le hi you sleep ASP Hi Were you sleeping A: n f] mei vou a NEC SFP No c: ;i^ 11,^ iw wo xiao xiao a I name SFP This is Xiao Xiao A; \i'L f/]; hf. ei ni hao hi you well Oh Hi. C: III, kf. ei ni hao hi you well Hi. ' 4 5 5 A: W'Jl. ei Hi. sp c: n I'l- f"! f"i 'li •; fi'i wo xiang zai wen wen ni yao yi xie dian hua hao ma I think again ask ask you want one some phone number I would like to ask for more phone numbers (at closinu) C; If kf. ^ na hao that good OK PC A; v;t U m. jiu zhe yang a just this SFP So much for now. (more talk on C"s upcoming trip.) A: fr. xing OK^ IC W f'j^ • III!;! Jxl m. na ni yi lu shun feng o then you one road smooth wind SFP Have a good trip c: m. iw iw f/j; m. o xie xie ni a OK thank thank you SFP OK. Thanks a lot. A: m. o OK 4 5 (y C; f/j: tH • ni ye yi yang o you also same SFP The same to you. A: kf (\'i //fr. hao de xing OK PT OX OK. // OK C: //|"I ;!(: Iifl fl'J |i]- m fx. hui lai zan men zai lian xi return we PL again contact 11 We'll get in touch again when we return. Ill\^ o /// OK. A; ///l-I iifj ffl jij- IK fx. hui lai zan men zai lian xi return we PL again contact /// We'll get in touch again when we return. w, hao good foK. c. [df. hao good foK LT jij. 1^. zai jian again see Bye. I If 'AL. Iif. zai jian hao again see good Bye OK ^ 4 5 8 CAE 1 ff 7 OPIA; (recorded message) Please hold while your call is being transferred. OP2A: This is Julia. What can I help you with'^ C; Oh. I, I need to rent a car A; At what location"^ (at closing) A: You can even cancel it if you forget it C; Oh,//really'' A; //You can come back later and cancel it. C: Oh, you're so nice.. A: You're the nicest. That's whv we do this. C: Ok IC Thank you A: Let me transfer you. One moment. C Ok A: Ok 4 5 9 CAE 2^13 OP A: Physics Depparatment. C: Hello. This is Xiaoli from the SP I just want to know when the offices close today A: Around five o'clock C: Five o'clock'^ Ok IC Thank vou// very much. A; //Ok ' LT C; ///Bye-bye' A: /// Bye! 4 6 (I CAE 3 # 16 OPIA: (recorded message) Thank you for calling Pacific Airline. 0P2A: Pacific Airline Nina Smith. C: Hi SP I'd like to know your fare for a round trip from Phoenix to San Francisco (at closing) A: You want to go aead and secure the seats on that. Mam"* C: No. I just want to ask about the price. IC Thank you very much for your information. A; Thank you for calling Pacific Airline. C: Thank you LT C: //Bye A: //Bye-bye. • 4 6 I CAE 4#5 OP A: West Travel This is Cathy C: Urn hi. SP Could you please tell me the lowest airfare from Tucson to Los Angelos on June 7th"^ A: On June 7th'^ C: Yeah. I'd like to leave on June 7, come back on June 9th (at closing) C: I'll contact you later. A: OK C: Thank you very much A: All right Bye-bye C Bye! CAE 5 #1 1 OP 1 A: Savers. May I help you"' C: Can I have serv ice deli'' A: Pardon'' C: Service deli A; I still didn't hear you Who do you need'' C: Uh service deli A. Service deli=' C: =Yeah A; Just a moment please C; OK. Thank'you OP2A: Service deli. How may I help you'' C: Can I have some question'' SP What time open ' A: Oh, what time we open'' C: Yeah. A: Um usually at 7 am. (at closing)' C: OK: IC Thank vou: A: OK Thank you= C; =tbr information for me. A; 0K= C; =Thank you A: OK. LT C: Bye-bye A: Bye 4 6 J CAE 2 # 4 OP A: (missing'!') C: Hello Is this Mrs.Carlos'^ A: Yes PH C: You guess who I am. he he he (laughter) A; Your voice sounds familiar C: Yea, this is Xiaoli. A: Oh. yeah= C: =You forget about me already. (laughter) A: No, you forget about us. C: No:: he he he (laughter) I. I. I went. 1 got back // two weeks A: // I know. I know you were gone C: Yeah I'm at school again taking classes ever\- day, you know I start my class at 7. A: So::: C: //from 7 to A: //It's close, it's a good thing you live real close. C: Yea, and every day Monday through Friday A: Um C: It's so painful, you know= A: =0h, you are //a busy woman C: //because it has been for tw o weeks. A: he he he (laughter) C: Yea. 1 have one more, yea. 3 weeks actually I have just one more w eek and a half to go. //Now A: //How was your trip"^ C: Oh. it's, it's wonderfijl. I had really great time at home. A: Uh hum C: but just too short. Then the day, just the day before, you know, I got back the weekend, then I started classes on Monday It was all messy. A: Uh hum C: I thought I'd call you, then I caught up with homework and work ever\' day SP How are you doing'!* 4 6 4 (at closing) PC C: Ok. ril tmd some time to visit you both. A: All right, Xiaoli, any time. Just call us so that we're sure to be home. C. Yeah, and not to give you a surprise. A; Yeah. You will be. 1 might have a hean attack. C: he he he (laughter) A: (laughter) C; Probably Mr Carlos will A: Ok //Xiaoli C; //OK /// yeah A; ///Yeah IC C: and best regards // to A; //Thanks for calling C. to Mr Carlos A: 1 will. LT C: [Bye-bye A: [Bye-bye CAE 3 # 20 OP A: Hello C; Oh, may I speak to Cathy'^ A. This is Cathy C: Hi, Cathy //This is Louise. A; //Hey. PH A; How is it going, Yilin'^ C. (laughter) Fine. A: Fine"' C: How are you"' A; Fm doing good C: Uh hum. SP Did you go to school today"' (at closing) PC C: Okay, it's so nice talking to you Cathy A: All right. Yilin Well, I'll let you go. C; Uh hum. A; And you can. give it, I hope your friend enjoys our conversation (more on recorded conversation) A: And 1 11 tr\' to, as I said, give you a call, too. C; Uh hum. A: In the near future, C: 1 will A: to tmd out how your semester is going C: Uh hum. •A.: and everything. C; Let's keep in touch. A: Okay Sounds like a good plan. C. (laughter) A; All right, Louise. Well. hey. if you see Sally, tell her that I said Hi, C: Okay. I will. •A: Okay"' And Adam, Josh, and her husband, I forgot his name. C; Yeah, // I will. A: //OK. C: //Uhhum A; All right, great. 4 (> 6 IC Talk to you later c Thank you A: You're welcome LT C: [Bye A: [Bye-bye 4 6 7 CAE 5 # 1 OP A; Hello. C. Ei Caroline A: Hi, Jiping. PH C: How are you'^ A: I'm OK. How are you'^ C: Fine SP Last, last night I call you. A; Yeah. C: You. you see my phone"^ A; Yeah today 1 see . My husband told me (at closing)- C: I, I'll take care A; OK. C: OK; A: OK IC C: [Nice talk A: [Tell everybody hi. Say Hi to Susan. Miss vou and Susan. C: OK:' A: OK. I will see you later C: //See you later. A: //Oh. sav Debra Hi too C OK: A: OK: LT Bye-bye C: Hi your husband. OK'^ A: OK. C: OK A; Bye-bye: C: Bye-bye: CAE I ^ 20 OP A; Hello C: Hello May I speak to Mrs. Ova"^ A: Hi, this is Cheri C: Urn pardon^ A; This is Cheri. C: Oh (laugh) PH A; How are you"^ C: Uh, fine This is Jenny s mother, you know, right'^ A: Hi Would you say your tlrst name for me'^ C: UhHuaZhen." Zhen, my last name is Zhen, Z like Zebra. My first name is Hua. H U A (spelt) A: Oh,//Ok C; //hua A; Hua C: Yeah A. That's easy. Ok C; Yeah. A; I want to apologize about last night. I was babysitting C: Oh that's O/Zk" .A; //for a gir, my the ///girl that helped me with Jill. C: ///girl friend (.A continued to apologize) SP C; So, yesterday 1 talked to my husband about the party, and we think Jenny can stay over the night A: Oh, that's // wonderful C: //Yeah, that's her Yeah, she's really very excited about that. (at closing) A: Ok, super, C: (laugh) A All right C Ok A: All right 4 6 9 C Ok= IC A: =We"ll be talking to you. C Yeah A Ok LT A: //Bye-bye C: //Bye-bye CAE 2 # 6 OP I A: Hello. C: Hello Is Verona there'^ A: Yes, may I ask who's calling' C: This is Xiaoli A: Sure Just a moment. OP2A: Hi, Xiaoli C; Hi, Verona, (laughter) PH How are you doing'' A: Thank you for calling me back. C; Finally, we can talk to each other. A; (laughter) Yeah. C: Yeah. I went out for some exercise A; A ha, good for you. (Both of them laughed) SP A; Well, after 1 called you last night, uh, I discovered that you're not teaching this session, are you'' (at closing) C; Ok, [then A; [Yeah C: Yeah. IC I will talk to vou later A; Ok C: and enjoy your trip to Seattle. A; Than k you: and um:: I'll give you a call when I get back. C: All right. A; All right Thanks a lot, Xiaoli. C; //Sure A: //Ok LT C; Bye-bye A; Bye-bye 4 7 1 CAE 3 # 18 OP A: Hello C: Hello, Rebecca A; Ye//s. C: //This is Yilin A; Yeah C Hi. Did Olive tell you that I would call you tonight'^ A: Yea. he said you would HC^) PH C: //Oh, I'm sorry Should've called you earlier, but you know our telephone is extremely busy because three new students have just moved into the apartment A: Yeah C: next door They haven't started their telephone service yet, so thev have come to A: Oh. C: our apartment Okay C: to make phone calls A. Okay, just a minute. I've got one that wants to say Hello here (A's baby daughter exchangeed Hello with C over the phone) A: So SP C: Yeah, I want to konw, do you know if there is a gynocology check up for female students on campus here:* once a year'^ A: Yeah (at closing) A: Ok. well C; //Ok, A: ll{V) IC C: Thank you very much./// Rebecca. A: ///All right. Okay. We'll talk to you again. C: Uh hum. LT A: Bye C; Bye C.AJE 4 # 6 OPIA; Hello C: Is this Joan\' A; Hello'^ C: Is this Joan"^ A: Oh yes. Hold on just a second. C: OK 0P2A: Hello C: Hi, Joan A: Hi. PH //How are you doing"^ C: //This is Jing. Fine. Thank you. SP uh: 1 just want to tell you last Thursday. I found only a few napkins left (at closing) A: OK'' C: OK A: Is that all you need to tell me"^ C: Un hum. IC A; // C'') C: //(laugh) LT A: ///Bye-bye.. C; ///Thank you Bye CAE 5 # 13 OPIAI ; //Hello A2; //Hello C; Are you Brenda'^ A!: Hang on. (to .A2) Hang up. Are you there"^ C; Urn: I'm Jipin. A1: Are you looking for Brenda"^ C: Yeah. A; Han" on C: OK 0P2A; Hello C: Are you Brenda' A: Uh hum C: I'm Jipin. A: Oh, hi C: Oh hi. PH How are you'^ (laugh) You remember me'!* A; Of course C: (laughter) A: C) SP C; You still working Provo High School'^ A: Yeah We moved to C^"^) but C: Where, moved to where'^ A: It's 200 North. C: Later, later 200 North. (at closing) PC C: OK. Thank you for your information. A; You're welcome. C; Do you go to Xiao Xiao's home'!* (more talk on friends) C: OK:: A: You tell me when C: Yeah. I'll tell you when, then A; OK C: Yeah, then, Pauline, you, together comin A: OK. C: OK A: Sounds uood 4 7 4 IC C: Thank: you: A; Thank you.' LT Bye-bye C: Bye-bye CAE 6# 16 OP A: Hello C Hi:: A: Hi C: Where are you going today'^ A: Where am I C: Uh hum A: At my old house C: So your, where, your new house have your old. have your phone number phone, telephone!* A: Yes. C: or different? A: Two houses. C^"^) C: Same phone number'^ A: C^'^) SP C: Yes, yesterday i call you. You get my message'!* (at closing) PC C: OK, see you Saturday. (more talk on their nicknames) IC C: OK, see you Saturday A: OK. C: OK Love you A: Love you too Thanks for calling. C: You're welcome LT A: [Bye C: [OK Bye. 4 7 6 REFERENCES Basso, K. H. (1990) Stalking with stories; Names, places, and moral narratives among the Western Apache. In K. H. Basso (Ed ), Western Apache lanauaue and culture (pp 99-137). Tucson: University Of Arizona Press. Blum-Kulka, S (1991) Interlanguage pragmatics: The case of requests. In R. Phillipson. E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M S. Smith, & M Swain (Eds ), Foreiun/Second Lanuuaue pedaaouv research (pp.255-272) Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Blum-Kulka, S , & Sheflfer, H. (1993). The metapragmatic discourse of American-Israeli families at dinner. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interianuuaue pragmatics (pp. 196-223). New York: Oxford University Press. Blum-Kulka, S , & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Lanuuaae Acquisition. 8(2), 165-179 Cambridge University Press Brown, G., & Yule. G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Byrnes, H. (1986). Interactional style in German and American conversations. Text. 6(2). 189-206. Chang, H.. & Holt, G. R. (1994). Debt-Repaying mechanism in Chinese relationships: An exploration of the folk concepts of Pao and Human emotional debt. Research on lanauaue and social interaction. 27 (4), 351-387. Clark, H. H., & French. J W (1981). Telephone goodbyes Lanuuaae in Societv. 10. 1-19 Cohen, A. (1996). Speech acts. In S. L. Mckay& N H. Hornberger (Eds.), Sociolinuuistics and lan^ua^e teaching (pp.383-419). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cooley, R., & Lujan, P. (1982). A structural analysis of speeches by Native American students. In F Barkin, E. A. Brandt, & J. Ornstein-Galicia (Eds ), Bilinuualism and lanauaue contact (pp. 80-92). New York: Teachers College Press. Crago, M. B. (1992). Communicative interaction and second language acquisition: .An inuit example. TESOL Quarterly. 26(3) 487-505 4 7 7 Drew, P. & Heritage, J (1992). Analyzing talk at work: an introduction. In P Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp.3-66) Duranti, A, (1993). Intentions, self, and responsibility: An essay in Samoan ethnopragmatics. In J. H. Hill, & J T Irvine (Eds ). Responsibility and evidence in oral discourse (pp 24-47) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Ferguson, C A. (1975) Toward a characterization of English foreign talk Anthropological Linguistics. JJZ (1). 1-14. Freed. A. F. (1992) We understand perfectly: A critique of Tannen's view of cross-se\ communication. Proceedings of the second Berkeley woman and language conference, (pp. 144-52) Giles. H. (1975) Speech style and social evaluation. London; Academic Goffman, E. (1974) Frame analysis. New York: Harper «& Row Goodwin. M H (1990). He said she said. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Gudykunst. W . Yoon. Y . & Nishida, T (1987). The influence of individualism- Collectivism on perceptions of communication in ingroup and outgroup relationships Communication Monographs. 54. 275-306 Gumperz. J J (i982a) Discourse Strateuies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Gumperz. J. J (1986) Interactional sociolinguistics in the study of schooling In J Cook- Gumperz (Eds ). The social construction of literacy (pp 45-68) Cambridge Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, J. J (1992). Contextuaiization and understanding. In A Duranti & C Goodwin (Eds ), Rethinking context: Lanuuage as an interactive phenomenon (pp.229-252) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gumperz, J J., Aulakh, G. & Kaltman, H. (1982b). Thematic structure and progression in discourse. In J J. Gumperz & J. Cook-Gumperz (Eds ). Language and social identity Gunthner. S. (1993a) German-Chinese interactions: Differences in contextuaiization conventions and resulting miscommunication. IPRA. 3(3):283-304 4 7 8 Gunthner, S. (1993b). The negotiation of dissent in intercultural communication: An analysis of a CHinese-Gerrnan conversation. A paper presented at the 4th International Praamatic Conference. Kolb: Japan. July 25-30, 1993 Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Languaue as social semiotic London: University Park Press Heath, S B. (1986) What no bedtime story means: narrative skills at home and school In B. B Schietfelin & E Ochs (Eds ), Language socialization across cultures (pp.97-124). New York: Cambridge University Press. Heritage, J. (1989) Current developments in conversational analysis. In D. Roger and P Bull (Eds ), Cortversation: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 21-47) New \'ork Multilingual Matters LTD Hinkel, E. (1994) Topic appropriateness in cross-cultural social con\ ersations Pragmatics and Language Learning. 5, 163-179 Hopper, R. (1992). Telephone conversation Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press Hopper, R. & Doany, N. K. (1989) Telephone openings and conversational universals: .-X study in three languages. In S.Ting-Toomey & F Korzenny (Eds ), Lan^ua^e• communication: and culture (pp.157-179). Houtkoop-Steenstra. H. (1991) Openings in Dutch telephone conversations In Boden. D &D H. Zimmerman (Eds ). Talk and social structure (pp 232-250). Cambridge Polity Press Hymes, D. (1972). Models of the interaction of language and social life In G. Gumperz & D, Hymes (Eds ), Directions in sociolinuuistics (pp. 35-71). Kasper, G. & Blum-Kulka, S (1993) Interlanguage pragmatics: An introduction. In G Kasper& S. Blum-kulka (Eds ), Interlanuuage Praumatics. New York: Oxford University Press Keenan, O. E. (1976) The universality of conversational postulates Language in Society. 5, 67-80. Laver, J D. M. H. (1981). Linguistic routines and politeness in greeting and parting In F. Coulmas (ed ). Conversational Routine (pp. 289-304). The Hague: Mouton Lindstrom, A. (1994). Identification and recognition in Swedish telephone conversation openings. Lanuuaue in Society. 23(2), 231-252. 4 7 9 Ochs, E 1979 Transcription as theory In E. Ochs & B.B SchiefFelin (Eds ), Developmental praumatics (PP.43-72). New York; Academic Pavlidou, T (1994).-Contrasting German-Greek politeness and the consequences. Journal of Praumatics. 21, 487-5 1 I. Philips, S. U (1983). The invisible culture: Communication in classroom and community on the Warm Sprinu Indian Reservation. New York: Longman. Saville-Troike, M. (1987). The Ethnography of Speaking. In U Amnion. N Dittmra. & K J. Matteier (Eds ), Sociolin^uistics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 661-671. Saville-Troike. M. (1989). The Ethnouraphv of Communication (2nd ed). Oxford Basil Blackwell. Saville-Troike. M. & Johnson, D. M. (1994). Comparative rhetoric An integration of perspectives. Praumatics and Lanuuage Learning. 5, 23 1-246 Schegloff, E. (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings American Anthropologist. 70, 1075-1095. Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings In G. Psathas (Ed ). Evervdav Lanauage: Studies in ethnomethodologv (pp 23-78) New York: Irvington. Schegloff, E. A. (1986) The routine as achievement Human Studies. 9. 111-151 Schegloff, E .A.. & Sacks, H. (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica. 8(4). 289-327 Schiffrin, D (1994) .Approaches to discourse. Cambridge, M.A.: Blackwell Scollon, R. (1993) Cumulative ambiguity: Conjunctions in Chinese-English intercultural communication. Perspectives: Working papers of the Department of English Hong Kong: City Polytechnic of Hong Kong. 5(1), Spring, 55-73 Scollon, R.. & Scollon, S W. (1981) Narrative, literacy, and face in interethnic communication. Norwood, NJ: .AblexCorp. Scollon, R., & Scollon. S W (1990) Epilogue to "Athabaskan-English interethnic communication." In D. Carbaugh (Ed.), Cultural communication and intercultural contact (pp.287-290 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum .Associates. 4X0 Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (1991) Topic confusion in English-Asian discourse World Enulishes. 10(2). 1 13-25. Sifianou, M (1989). On the telephone again! Differences in telephone behavior; England vs. Greece. Lanauaue in Society. 18. 524-544. Singh, D , Leie, J., & Martohardjono, G. (1988). Communication in a multilingual society Some missed opportunities. Language in Society. 17:43-59 Sun, H. (1995). Pauses and co-construction in Chinese peer review discussions Pragmatics and Language Learnina. 6, 121-141 Takahashi, T & Beebe. L. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal. 8. 131-155. Tannen. D (1981) Indirectness in discourse: Ethnicity as conversational style Discourse Processes. 3(4),'221-238. Tannen, D. (1984) Conversational style: Analyzing talk amonu friends Norwood. NJ Ablex. Tannen, D (1985) Cross-cultural communication. In T A Van Dijk (Ed ), Handbook of discourse analysis. 4, 203-215. London: Academic Tannen, D. (1990). You iust don't understand: Talk between the sexes. New York Morrow Tannen. D (1994) From nine to five Women and men in the work place: Lanuuaue. se.x and power. New York: Avon Books Tao, H., & Thompson, S. (1991). English backchannels in Mandarin conversations: .A case study of superstratum pragmatic "inference" Journal of Pragmatics. 16: 209-223 Thomas, J (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linuuistics. 4. 91-1 12. Tung, W (1993). Easy Chinese phrase book and dictionary Lincolnwood, IL. Passport Books. Tyler, A. et. al. (1988). The effect of discourse stnicturing devices on listener perceptions of coherence in non-native university teacher's spoken discourse. World Englishes. 7(2), lOI-l 10. 4 X 1 Tyler, A., & Bro, J. (1992). Discourse structure in nonnative English discourse Studies in Second Lanuuaue Acquisition. 14. 71-86. Wheeler, L.. Reis, H. T , & Bond, M H. (1989). Collectivism-Individualism in ever>day social life: The middle kingdom and the melting pot Journal of Personalitv and Social Psvcholouv. 57( 1), 79-86. White, S. (1989). Backchannels across cultures: A study of Americans and Japanese Lanuuaue in Society. 18. 59-76. Wolfson, N (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinauistics and TESOL. Cambridge/New York: Newbury House Publishers. Yamada. H. (1990) Topic management and turn distribution in business meetings •American versus Japanese strategies. Text. 10(3), 271-295 Young, L. W. (1982). Inscrutability revisited. In J, J Gumperz (Ed ), Lanuuage and social identity (pp.72-84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Young, L. W L (1994) Crosstalk and culture in Sino-American communication Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yum, J. O. (1988) The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs. 55. 374-388 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (QA-3) 1.0 12.8 12.5 •M III 2.2 • 3.6 11^ I.I 11 '-S 1.25 1.4 1.6 150mm IM/4C3E . Inc 1653 East Main Street Rochester, NY 14609 USA Phone: 716/482-0300 Fax: 716/288-5989 O 1993. Applied Image. Inc.. All Rights Reserved